Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Time)   Atheists are now creating their own anti-Nativity scenes   (ideas.time.com) divider line 476
    More: Interesting, nativity, Freedom From Religion Foundation, Yale Law School, Santa Monica  
•       •       •

21983 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Dec 2012 at 2:23 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



476 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-12-02 12:30:40 AM  
What's Anti-Nativity mean? Three dumb women travel to see a dying old man and steal sh*t from him?
 
2012-12-02 12:35:04 AM  
No, they aren't. Well, maybe someone somewhere is, but not in TFA.
 
2012-12-02 12:37:47 AM  
Let's keep Christmas in the malls where it belongs
 
2012-12-02 12:41:29 AM  
Tolerance is a fine thing.

Taken in moderation.
 
2012-12-02 12:42:33 AM  
Why would they want an anti-religious display?

Just let the nativity scenes be set up on private property rather than public property. It is a a bit silly, having a religious display on public land is not prohibited, nor is a secular display. But why keep lawyers in business when you can just move them to a church or some other private property.

Why fight with people who insist on shiatting on nice things?
 
2012-12-02 12:45:42 AM  
What is this? We have nothing against seamen.

.
 
2012-12-02 12:45:50 AM  
Put up all the nativity scenes you want on church or private property. It's easy.

Most people wanting to put them up on government property are probably the same who believe government is bad. Get off the government teat and put them up on your own or your church's property.
 
2012-12-02 12:46:09 AM  
Pork....

thechive.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-12-02 12:47:59 AM  

Errk: Pork....

[thechive.files.wordpress.com image 500x375]


Of all the nativity scenes I've ever seen, that one's the wurst
 
2012-12-02 12:53:36 AM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: that one's the wurst


Ugh.
 
2012-12-02 12:54:02 AM  

Errk: Pork....

[thechive.files.wordpress.com image 500x375]


Why is there what appears to be a sedan on the right hand side of the nativity scene?
 
2012-12-02 12:56:18 AM  

jaylectricity: MaudlinMutantMollusk: that one's the wurst

Ugh.


Really.... I never sausage a thing
 
2012-12-02 12:56:27 AM  

BSABSVR: Errk: Pork....

[thechive.files.wordpress.com image 500x375]

Why is there what appears to be a sedan on the right hand side of the nativity scene?


That is not a sedan, that is an LP gas tank.
 
jbc [TotalFark]
2012-12-02 01:06:03 AM  

jaylectricity: MaudlinMutantMollusk: that one's the wurst

Ugh.


When it comes to bad puns in Fark threads, the myrrh the merrier.
 
2012-12-02 01:12:21 AM  

jbc: jaylectricity: MaudlinMutantMollusk: that one's the wurst

Ugh.

When it comes to bad puns in Fark threads, the myrrh the merrier.


That makes no frankincense.
 
2012-12-02 01:13:40 AM  
An anti-Nativity scene would be a lean-to where animals bleat, shiat, smell, and eat hay from the manger.

// Where can I get some "barn smell" scent spray?
 
2012-12-02 01:14:21 AM  

This About That: An anti-Nativity scene would be a lean-to where animals bleat, shiat, smell, and eat hay from the manger.

// Where can I get some "barn smell" scent spray?


Any politics thread
 
2012-12-02 01:15:42 AM  
I think these assholes are the reason i finally deicded on Apatheism. They remind me of christian wingnuts. They only feel free if they are trying to tell other hows to be free.
 
2012-12-02 01:20:36 AM  

Revek: these assholes ... remind me of christian wingnuts


Bingo.
 
2012-12-02 01:25:32 AM  

This About That: Revek: these assholes ... remind me of christian wingnuts

Bingo.


You have a gift for brevity that I envy.
 
2012-12-02 01:27:02 AM  
Just put Nativity scenes on church lawns and the issue goes away. why do they need to be anywhere else?
 
2012-12-02 01:35:49 AM  
The Supreme Court has ruled that when the government opens up public property to private citizens - when it creates a public forum for speech - it cannot discriminate in favor of some viewpoints and against others.  

So, STFU about your oppression and the WAR ON CHRISTMAS™ and pack up your nativity scenes and take them somewhere private. I bet your church would let you set up a creche on their property. Why, I bet any number of individuals and businesses would gladly let you set up your displays on their property.

STOP SETTING THIS SHIAT UP ON PUBLIC PROPERTY
 
2012-12-02 01:38:45 AM  

This About That: Revek: these assholes ... remind me of christian wingnuts

Bingo.


Yeah, those damn atheists always putting up displays on Darwin's birthday, even though the courts tell them EVERY. farkING. YEAR. to knock it off.

And then they use it as an excuse to whine about the WAR on science and reason!
 
2012-12-02 01:39:36 AM  
The Puritans outlawed nativity scenes, so I guess these atheists are carrying on with a long Christian tradition. There's a tradition in Catalonia to include a caganer, or a little figure in mid bowel motion.
 
2012-12-02 01:41:03 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: This About That: Revek: these assholes ... remind me of christian wingnuts

Bingo.

Yeah, those damn atheists always putting up displays on Darwin's birthday, even though the courts tell them EVERY. farkING. YEAR. to knock it off.

And then they use it as an excuse to whine about the WAR on science and reason!


Lets get this guy some clown shoes.
 
2012-12-02 01:42:46 AM  

Revek: Lionel Mandrake: This About That: Revek: these assholes ... remind me of christian wingnuts

Bingo.

Yeah, those damn atheists always putting up displays on Darwin's birthday, even though the courts tell them EVERY. farkING. YEAR. to knock it off.

And then they use it as an excuse to whine about the WAR on science and reason!

Lets get this guy some clown shoes.


Do you have a point to make, or should I just ignore you?
 
2012-12-02 01:51:31 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: Revek: Lionel Mandrake: This About That: Revek: these assholes ... remind me of christian wingnuts

Bingo.

Yeah, those damn atheists always putting up displays on Darwin's birthday, even though the courts tell them EVERY. farkING. YEAR. to knock it off.

And then they use it as an excuse to whine about the WAR on science and reason!

Lets get this guy some clown shoes.

Do you have a point to make, or should I just ignore you?


His point is that he sells novelty oversized shoes for people who are self-conscious about the size of their feet and is using Fark for a viral marketing scheme.
 
2012-12-02 01:54:27 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: Revek: Lionel Mandrake: This About That: Revek: these assholes ... remind me of christian wingnuts

Bingo.

Yeah, those damn atheists always putting up displays on Darwin's birthday, even though the courts tell them EVERY. farkING. YEAR. to knock it off.

And then they use it as an excuse to whine about the WAR on science and reason!

Lets get this guy some clown shoes.

Do you have a point to make, or should I just ignore you?


That you come in talking about how atheist don't do this or don't' do that but the truth is that they just do different asshole things. But by all means ignore me. I just simply don't care how wrong you are about the tendency of atheist to be just as uncompromising in their quest to be... Well assholes
 
2012-12-02 01:55:20 AM  

LucklessWonder: Lionel Mandrake: Revek: Lionel Mandrake: This About That: Revek: these assholes ... remind me of christian wingnuts

Bingo.

Yeah, those damn atheists always putting up displays on Darwin's birthday, even though the courts tell them EVERY. farkING. YEAR. to knock it off.

And then they use it as an excuse to whine about the WAR on science and reason!

Lets get this guy some clown shoes.

Do you have a point to make, or should I just ignore you?

His point is that he sells novelty oversized shoes for people who are self-conscious about the size of their feet and is using Fark for a viral marketing scheme.


I have to say I really like your answer better.
 
2012-12-02 02:05:31 AM  

Relatively Obscure: No, they aren't. Well, maybe someone somewhere is, but not in TFA.


From TFA: Three years ago, Vix asked the city government to let him put up an antireligious display in the park alongside the Nativity scenes.

That's what subby meant by anti-Nativity scene.

/not subby
 
2012-12-02 02:14:41 AM  

Revek: That you come in talking about how atheist don't do this or don't' do that but the truth is that they just do different asshole things.


For example?

Revek: I just simply don't care how wrong you are about the tendency of atheist to be just as uncompromising in their quest to be... Well assholes


When are atheists uncompromising?

When they demand that the Constitution be applied equally to all groups? When they fight to keep "Intelligent Design" out of science textbooks? When, like one guy sues over "In God We Trust" on the money? OK, that guy's an ass, but I happen to agree it doesn't belong there. Nevertheless, that is like ONE guy. Unless he's your neighbor or a relative, you can easily ignore the whole thing.

What exactly do atheists do but talk on a TV that you can turn off, and write books you don't have to buy, and chat in threads that you don't have to read?
 
2012-12-02 02:18:24 AM  

Revek: but the truth is that they just do different asshole things.


different asshole things....like expecting the same privilege granted to religious institutions? cause that's all that happened here.
 
2012-12-02 02:22:21 AM  
Well now that the puns are over and the arguing has started.. I don't understand why an atheist would put up anything, other than to be a troll. Now I get your point, these churchy things should be on private land, I agree, but even if they all were, you would still put up whatever non-decoration it is you put up. You would put it up religiously, in fact. That's your right, to troll the hell out of people, and I'm fine with it, but I don't get it, with your analytical reasoning and facts and all, there are biological and evolutionary mysteries to solve and fretting about silly religious displays should be beneath you. It doesn't suit you.

Happy Holidays.
 
2012-12-02 02:25:27 AM  
it sounds like the Atheist have found a new area to explore.

and this is Buggs Bunny reporting from London.
 
2012-12-02 02:26:18 AM  
You're welcome.
 
2012-12-02 02:26:25 AM  
This seems like entirely too much work to embarass people who don't deserve that kind of effort.
 
2012-12-02 02:27:00 AM  
Whoops. Link didn't take.

Zombie Nativity Scene
 
2012-12-02 02:30:16 AM  
I've always felt a little admiration for the Moslems' proscription on graven images. How soon archetypes become icons.
 
2012-12-02 02:30:21 AM  
Now, get "In God We Trust" off your fecking money, and you'll be able to take a few more steps away from ignorance.
 
2012-12-02 02:31:46 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: Revek: That you come in talking about how atheist don't do this or don't' do that but the truth is that they just do different asshole things.

For example?

Revek: I just simply don't care how wrong you are about the tendency of atheist to be just as uncompromising in their quest to be... Well assholes

When are atheists uncompromising?

When they demand that the Constitution be applied equally to all groups? When they fight to keep "Intelligent Design" out of science textbooks? When, like one guy sues over "In God We Trust" on the money? OK, that guy's an ass, but I happen to agree it doesn't belong there. Nevertheless, that is like ONE guy. Unless he's your neighbor or a relative, you can easily ignore the whole thing.

What exactly do atheists do but talk on a TV that you can turn off, and write books you don't have to buy, and chat in threads that you don't have to read?


That you seek to tell us all how this unknown thing is this way rather than that way. In this respect you are identical to the theist. And how is it that the guy who wants in god we trust off the money is any different from the guy who want the nativity scene off the public land. To me, Both assholes. These things don't force you to go to church. They don't force you to believe. If it offends the eye then do not look upon it, My eyes see it all with equal doubt and I am not offended.
 
2012-12-02 02:32:12 AM  

Valiente: Now, get "In God We Trust" off your fecking money, and you'll be able to take a few more steps away from ignorance.


yes. such a major issue...
 
2012-12-02 02:33:10 AM  
What happened to live and let live? All sorts of things go up on public land and I don't give a shiat. If I don't like the look of it, I don't look at it. Please don't fark up Christmas celebrations to a point to where no one gets the day off, guys.

/atheist
//If you take my Christmas day, I will CUT YOU!
 
2012-12-02 02:33:37 AM  

Errk: Pork....

[thechive.files.wordpress.com image 500x375]


As an agnostic, I simply do not know whether I should respond with:

Jesus your nativity scene looks delicious.

or

Jesus, your nativity scene looks delicious.
 
2012-12-02 02:34:57 AM  
This is like a long running Elephants turd.
 
2012-12-02 02:36:37 AM  

othmar: This is like a long running Elephants turd.


You sir have vision.
 
2012-12-02 02:36:55 AM  
I have no problem with tasteful and respectful holiday displays from any religion or group.
 
2012-12-02 02:37:35 AM  

log_jammin: Just put Nativity scenes on church lawns and the issue goes away. why do they need to be anywhere else?


Thisitty this.

Although I do have to laugh (to myself) when I see Xmas trees alongside the traditional nativity scenes. I mean, do you people even realize....and then I say, no, no you do not.
 
2012-12-02 02:37:42 AM  
Not discriminating against a group's rights to free speech, can /also/ be done in various other times of the year, right? In that way, as long as you keep the agenda open to anybody wanting to participate, you can have your nativity scene around christmas, and some Nietsche quote during, I don't know, october or something.
 
2012-12-02 02:38:52 AM  
We can put the Christ back in Christmas but first things first. Let's somehow attempt to insert the Christ into Christian.
 
2012-12-02 02:41:33 AM  

Revek: That you seek to tell us all how this unknown thing is this way rather than that way. In this respect you are identical to the theist. And how is it that the guy who wants in god we trust off the money is any different from the guy who want the nativity scene off the public land. To me, Both assholes. These things don't force you to go to church. They don't force you to believe. If it offends the eye then do not look upon it, My eyes see it all with equal doubt and I am not offended.


Boy, you like to generalize don't you?

Atheists are not trying to put non-science into science classes. They are not trying to put up monuments to E=mc2 or the laws of thermodynamics. Atheists do not knock on your door.

Everything an atheist does is easily not read, not watched, not listened to or walked away from.
 
2012-12-02 02:42:19 AM  
Just get a regular Nativity Scene diorama, and replace all of the people with those little bottles of booze they give you on the airplane.
Jack Daniels makes for the best baby Jebus.
 
2012-12-02 02:43:20 AM  

phrawgh: We can put the Christ back in Christmas but first things first. Let's somehow attempt to insert the Christ into Christian.


Truer words were never spoken. The problem with most Christians is that they get the word from the preacher instead of getting it from the book.

/That goes for Muslims to.
 
2012-12-02 02:44:25 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: They are not trying to put up monuments to E=mc2 or the laws of thermodynamics.


They probably should be.
 
2012-12-02 02:44:26 AM  

Revek: And how is it that the guy who wants in god we trust off the money is any different from the guy who want the nativity scene off the public land. To me, Both assholes. These things don't force you to go to church. They don't force you to believe. If it offends the eye then do not look upon it, My eyes


They're only asking government officials to stop violating the 1st Amendment prohibition on the government respecting an establishment of religion. It's not about feelings, it's about adherence to the supreme law of the land. How can a non-Christian expect due process at a courthouse covered in Christian labeling? How can I have faith that my government has my best interests in mind, if its very money is printed with a slogan for a religious group that has historically tortured and persecuted members of other religions?
 
2012-12-02 02:47:21 AM  
I'd sure like to put up a display for Eris and hand out free hot dogs on Fridays.
 
2012-12-02 02:47:23 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: Revek: That you come in talking about how atheist don't do this or don't' do that but the truth is that they just do different asshole things.

For example?

Revek: I just simply don't care how wrong you are about the tendency of atheist to be just as uncompromising in their quest to be... Well assholes

When are atheists uncompromising?

When they demand that the Constitution be applied equally to all groups? When they fight to keep "Intelligent Design" out of science textbooks? When, like one guy sues over "In God We Trust" on the money? OK, that guy's an ass, but I happen to agree it doesn't belong there. Nevertheless, that is like ONE guy. Unless he's your neighbor or a relative, you can easily ignore the whole thing.

What exactly do atheists do but talk on a TV that you can turn off, and write books you don't have to buy, and chat in threads that you don't have to read?


I always thought "E Pluribus Unum" made more sense on the money of a nation devoted to the theory of inclusion.
 
2012-12-02 02:48:36 AM  

HotWingAgenda: They're only asking government officials to stop violating the 1st Amendment prohibition on the government respecting an establishment of religion. It's not about feelings, it's about adherence to the supreme law of the land. How can a non-Christian expect due process at a courthouse covered in Christian labeling? How can I have faith that my government has my best interests in mind, if its very money is printed with a slogan for a religious group that has historically tortured and persecuted members of other religions?


I think you think too seriously about these things. Just let it go in these cases and you'll be much happier. It is what it is and this fight is better reserved for textbooks and national policy.
 
2012-12-02 02:50:12 AM  

HotWingAgenda: Revek: And how is it that the guy who wants in god we trust off the money is any different from the guy who want the nativity scene off the public land. To me, Both assholes. These things don't force you to go to church. They don't force you to believe. If it offends the eye then do not look upon it, My eyes

They're only asking government officials to stop violating the 1st Amendment prohibition on the government respecting an establishment of religion. It's not about feelings, it's about adherence to the supreme law of the land. How can a non-Christian expect due process at a courthouse covered in Christian labeling? How can I have faith that my government has my best interests in mind, if its very money is printed with a slogan for a religious group that has historically tortured and persecuted members of other religions?


Well said! Liberty and political freedoms are like muscles, if you don't use them, they shrink and go away. Putting up an "Anti-Nativity" isn't the point in itself, it's the flexing of religious freedoms, and pushing back against encroachment by the followers of a particular religion.
 
2012-12-02 02:50:32 AM  

inglixthemad: Lionel Mandrake: Revek: That you come in talking about how atheist don't do this or don't' do that but the truth is that they just do different asshole things.

For example?

Revek: I just simply don't care how wrong you are about the tendency of atheist to be just as uncompromising in their quest to be... Well assholes

When are atheists uncompromising?

When they demand that the Constitution be applied equally to all groups? When they fight to keep "Intelligent Design" out of science textbooks? When, like one guy sues over "In God We Trust" on the money? OK, that guy's an ass, but I happen to agree it doesn't belong there. Nevertheless, that is like ONE guy. Unless he's your neighbor or a relative, you can easily ignore the whole thing.

What exactly do atheists do but talk on a TV that you can turn off, and write books you don't have to buy, and chat in threads that you don't have to read?

I always thought "E Pluribus Unum" made more sense on the money of a nation devoted to the theory of inclusion.


fark that. Jesus got paid.
 
2012-12-02 02:50:51 AM  

Coming on a Bicycle: Not discriminating against a group's rights to free speech, can /also/ be done in various other times of the year, right? In that way, as long as you keep the agenda open to anybody wanting to participate, you can have your nativity scene around christmas, and some Nietsche quote during, I don't know, october or something.


Yup. All or nothing.

But why just a quote? If they can put up a big cross, can I put up a statue of Nietzsche? Or an upside-down cross?

The best, easiest and most reasonable solution is to keep them all off public property. There is a HELL of a lot of private property for all that.
 
2012-12-02 02:54:04 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: Revek: That you seek to tell us all how this unknown thing is this way rather than that way. In this respect you are identical to the theist. And how is it that the guy who wants in god we trust off the money is any different from the guy who want the nativity scene off the public land. To me, Both assholes. These things don't force you to go to church. They don't force you to believe. If it offends the eye then do not look upon it, My eyes see it all with equal doubt and I am not offended.

Boy, you like to generalize don't you?

Atheists are not trying to put non-science into science classes. They are not trying to put up monuments to E=mc2 or the laws of thermodynamics. Atheists do not knock on your door.

Everything an atheist does is easily not read, not watched, not listened to or walked away from.


Atheist are trying to convince peaceful people who are not trying to knock on your door that they are right and theist are wrong without having any proof they are right. Sound familiar? While you are worrying about them trying to take the science out of schools you should note they usually fail. On a bell curve atheist are at one end and the theist are at the other while most are somewhere in between. I find peace is usually in the middle.

/Salaam
 
2012-12-02 02:54:25 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: The best, easiest and most reasonable solution is to keep them all off public property. There is a HELL of a lot of private property for all that.


exactly. If every church and all of its member put nativity signs on all of their front lawns would it really matter if the guy trys to "troll" the town(by quotes) does something on his lawn? nope.
 
2012-12-02 02:54:26 AM  

inglixthemad: I always thought "E Pluribus Unum" made more sense on the money of a nation devoted to the theory of inclusion.


It was good enough for 180 years, but then...something something...and now people act like it was always "In God We Trust"
 
2012-12-02 02:56:29 AM  
They're just copycatting Festivus For The Rest Of Us
 
2012-12-02 02:56:38 AM  

Revek: This About That: Revek: these assholes ... remind me of christian wingnuts

Bingo.

You have a gift for brevity that I envy.


Ditto.
 
2012-12-02 02:56:50 AM  

Revek: Atheist are trying to convince peaceful people who are not trying to knock on your door that they are right and theist are wrong without having any proof they are right. Sound familiar?


Where is this happening that you can't change the channel or put back the book or walk away from the asshole?

Revek: While you are worrying about them trying to take the science out of schools you should note they usually fail.


And "usually" is good enough for you? Maybe you also noticed that they never get up. And they'll keep on losing...until they win.
 
2012-12-02 02:57:26 AM  
Living in Canada, when I (rarely) happen to mention to a religious person that I don't believe there is a God I don't get more than a "meh", so I don't understand why some atheists in the US seem to be so aggressive. But what I understand even less is the attitude that a lot of religious people in the States seem to have towards atheists. If you honestly believe that here is a God who loves you and will accept you into Heaven, but will send all these dirty non-believers to Hell, where is all the anger coming from? Shouldn't there be more pity than condescension, more love than hate? I know that if I believed I knew the ultimate nature of the Universe I'd feel a lot more secure. So... what's up with that?
 
2012-12-02 02:57:52 AM  
The only bigger asshole then a Christian has got to be an Atheist what a bunch of dickheads.
 
2012-12-02 02:57:53 AM  

violentsalvation: jbc: jaylectricity: MaudlinMutantMollusk: that one's the wurst

Ugh.

When it comes to bad puns in Fark threads, the myrrh the merrier.

That makes no frankincense.


These comments are gold!
 
2012-12-02 02:58:34 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: they never get up


never give up
 
2012-12-02 02:58:47 AM  

L.D. Ablo: I'd sure like to put up a display for Eris and hand out free hot dogs on Fridays.


Maybe a monument to the Original Snub?
 
2012-12-02 02:59:09 AM  

gadian: HotWingAgenda: They're only asking government officials to stop violating the 1st Amendment prohibition on the government respecting an establishment of religion. It's not about feelings, it's about adherence to the supreme law of the land. How can a non-Christian expect due process at a courthouse covered in Christian labeling? How can I have faith that my government has my best interests in mind, if its very money is printed with a slogan for a religious group that has historically tortured and persecuted members of other religions?

I think you think too seriously about these things. Just let it go in these cases and you'll be much happier. It is what it is and this fight is better reserved for textbooks and national policy.


That's the sort of attitude the typical German citizen had about Nazis, right up until they started grabbing people off the streets. At least, that's how my grandmother described it to me.
 
2012-12-02 02:59:11 AM  
I LIKE the lottery idea in the article. Random chance for limited space = nondiscrimination for Constitutional purposes.

Personally, I'm happy that there was a clustering if we assume all display applications can be placed into binary choices (Pro-theist & Anti-theist). A perfect distribution proportional to the entrants is a major red flag for a small scale, limited trial data run. A lopsided skewing shows randomness, and randomness is fair.

/Deist who enjoys math
 
2012-12-02 03:00:31 AM  
I'm all for Anti-Naivety scenes.
 
2012-12-02 03:01:36 AM  

log_jammin: Lionel Mandrake: The best, easiest and most reasonable solution is to keep them all off public property. There is a HELL of a lot of private property for all that.

exactly. If every church and all of its member put nativity signs on all of their front lawns would it really matter if the guy trys to "troll" the town(by quotes) does something on his lawn? nope.


It's almost like they purposely put shiat up on public property so they can whine when they're told to take it down.

almost...
 
2012-12-02 03:03:54 AM  
Those damn atheists screwed up an opportunity for the Christians to get their way like they always do. If you have a problem with the atheist pointing out he has a right, too...then I really don't know what to say. He didn't try to tear down the displays (like someone did last year to the atheist displays) and he went through the proper legal channels to receive a result that fits with expected constitutional rights.

Saying "he sure is an asshole" seems pretty short sighted when people of non faith are constantly fighting an uphill and sometimes losing battle.

I'll find issue with this fight when there are stories of atheists interrupting church sermons at midnight mass or something
 
2012-12-02 03:04:49 AM  

fusillade762: violentsalvation: jbc: jaylectricity: MaudlinMutantMollusk: that one's the wurst

Ugh.

When it comes to bad puns in Fark threads, the myrrh the merrier.

That makes no frankincense.

These comments are gold!


...more like wise guys
 
2012-12-02 03:05:41 AM  

Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: I LIKE the lottery idea in the article. Random chance for limited space = nondiscrimination for Constitutional purposes.


That's what they did last year, and the local Christian groups made a huge fuss and ended up suing the city, which led to the city cancelling it entirely this year because they were tired of getting shiat on.
 
2012-12-02 03:07:59 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: The Supreme Court has ruled that when the government opens up public property to private citizens - when it creates a public forum for speech - it cannot discriminate in favor of some viewpoints and against others.  

So, STFU about your oppression and the WAR ON CHRISTMAS™ and pack up your nativity scenes and take them somewhere private. I bet your church would let you set up a creche on their property. Why, I bet any number of individuals and businesses would gladly let you set up your displays on their property.

STOP SETTING THIS SHIAT UP ON PUBLIC PROPERTY


While this is all technically correct, I still find it a bit sad. I consider myself agnostic, but I still grew up in a church doing Christmas plays and what not. Nativity scenes are part and parcel of Christmas, just like a Christmas tree, egg nog, turkey and ham dinners, and Christmas music talking about Jesus. Perhaps some or all of these things don't apply to your Christmas, or maybe you don't celebrate or even recognize Christmas in any way, but that doesn't mean you have to be a dick about it.

Nativity scenes inspire warm feelings of remembrance and tradition in many people, and public grounds are a great place to put them because so many people can enjoy them in a common locale. Now the laws are correct, it wouldn't be right to allow a pro-Christ display without allowing an anti-Christ display as well. However I think there should also be some sort of a "don't be a farking asshole" law that judges the intent of such a display or something. A nativity scene is most likely meant to inspire and spread happiness and remembrance, whereas an anti-Christ display would most likely be intended to upset people, or at least not have warm-fuzzies as the reasoning behind it, arguments about indoctrination or whatever regarding a nativity scene aside.

Okay so religion has done a whole lot of bad things. There are assholes that are religious. There are also assholes that are non religious, and every other potential permutation of a human being can also consist of an asshole. I bet somebody thought Ghandi was a real piece of shiat. Unfortunately for you atheists, theists still comprise the majority so there tends to be more assholes that claim religion than otherwise, but that doesn't mean you need to work extra hard to represent the other side, or to ruin a holiday (holy-day, by the way, religion is sorta the reason you have the day off) traditionally meant to spread warmth cheer and good tidings.

If you want to be a grinch and refrain from enjoying the festivities that's fine, but nobody's hurting you with it so how about just being a decent human being for about a month a year? If you are being hurt by it, or if some person or group is doing something decidedly unmagnanimous, then by all means shut that shiat down. But until then how about a little live and let live where you don't piss in someone's corn flakes just because you don't like what some ignorant rednecks in Texas are doing to the education system.
 
2012-12-02 03:08:43 AM  

Gyrfalcon: Although I do have to laugh (to myself) when I see Xmas trees alongside the traditional nativity scenes. I mean, do you people even realize....and then I say, no, no you do not.


Every morning on my way to work I drive by the "Jesus is the reason for the season" Christmas tree lot. How's that for contradiction?
 
2012-12-02 03:11:32 AM  

Eddie Ate Dynamite: Lionel Mandrake: The Supreme Court has ruled that when the government opens up public property to private citizens - when it creates a public forum for speech - it cannot discriminate in favor of some viewpoints and against others.  

So, STFU about your oppression and the WAR ON CHRISTMAS™ and pack up your nativity scenes and take them somewhere private. I bet your church would let you set up a creche on their property. Why, I bet any number of individuals and businesses would gladly let you set up your displays on their property.

STOP SETTING THIS SHIAT UP ON PUBLIC PROPERTY

While this is all technically correct, I still find it a bit sad. I consider myself agnostic, but I still grew up in a church doing Christmas plays and what not. Nativity scenes are part and parcel of Christmas, just like a Christmas tree, egg nog, turkey and ham dinners, and Christmas music talking about Jesus. Perhaps some or all of these things don't apply to your Christmas, or maybe you don't celebrate or even recognize Christmas in any way, but that doesn't mean you have to be a dick about it.

Nativity scenes inspire warm feelings of remembrance and tradition in many people, and public grounds are a great place to put them because so many people can enjoy them in a common locale. Now the laws are correct, it wouldn't be right to allow a pro-Christ display without allowing an anti-Christ display as well. However I think there should also be some sort of a "don't be a farking asshole" law that judges the intent of such a display or something. A nativity scene is most likely meant to inspire and spread happiness and remembrance, whereas an anti-Christ display would most likely be intended to upset people, or at least not have warm-fuzzies as the reasoning behind it, arguments about indoctrination or whatever regarding a nativity scene aside.

Okay so religion has done a whole lot of bad things. There are assholes that are religious. There are also assholes that are non religious, and ev ...


Chances are you did that stuff in church or at your house. Nobody says you shouldn't.

But the 1st Amendment is simple: if Christians get to put up their stuff on PUBLIC PROPERTY, then so does everyone else.

It's very simple. All or nothing.
 
2012-12-02 03:12:15 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: Revek: Atheist are trying to convince peaceful people who are not trying to knock on your door that they are right and theist are wrong without having any proof they are right. Sound familiar?

Where is this happening that you can't change the channel or put back the book or walk away from the asshole?

Revek: While you are worrying about them trying to take the science out of schools you should note they usually fail.

And "usually" is good enough for you? Maybe you also noticed that they never get up. And they'll keep on losing...until they win.


Yup its a average and averages are usually in the middle.
 
2012-12-02 03:12:35 AM  

ShawnDoc: That's what they did last year, and the local Christian groups made a huge fuss and ended up suing the city, which led to the city cancelling it entirely this year because they were tired of getting shiat on.


What city and how did their officials do in the last election?
/just curious
 
2012-12-02 03:12:48 AM  

omgwtfetc: Living in Canada, when I (rarely) happen to mention to a religious person that I don't believe there is a God I don't get more than a "meh", so I don't understand why some atheists in the US seem to be so aggressive. But what I understand even less is the attitude that a lot of religious people in the States seem to have towards atheists. If you honestly believe that here is a God who loves you and will accept you into Heaven, but will send all these dirty non-believers to Hell, where is all the anger coming from? Shouldn't there be more pity than condescension, more love than hate? I know that if I believed I knew the ultimate nature of the Universe I'd feel a lot more secure. So... what's up with that?


Christians in America actively lobby the goverment to take freedoms away from other people to force them to follow what Christians believe is their god's laws. They use tax-free money to do this. What's not to love?
 
2012-12-02 03:13:55 AM  

HotWingAgenda: Revek: And how is it that the guy who wants in god we trust off the money is any different from the guy who want the nativity scene off the public land. To me, Both assholes. These things don't force you to go to church. They don't force you to believe. If it offends the eye then do not look upon it, My eyes

They're only asking government officials to stop violating the 1st Amendment prohibition on the government respecting an establishment of religion. It's not about feelings, it's about adherence to the supreme law of the land. How can a non-Christian expect due process at a courthouse covered in Christian labeling? How can I have faith that my government has my best interests in mind, if its very money is printed with a slogan for a religious group that has historically tortured and persecuted members of other religions?


Not that I disagree with the sentiment; but you do realize, don't you, that we have ALWAYS gotten due process at courthouses--including the highest in the land--"covered in Christian labeling." Courthouses that oftener than not dispensed fairly even-handed justice regarding establishment of religion IN FAVOR of no religion at all, while sitting in a big building with "IN GOD WE TRUST" carved on the lintels.

The point being that it's really irrelevant whether the Christian god is invoked at a courthouse, or the Muslim god, or indeed the Norse gods or the Flying Spaghetti Monster--as long as DUE PROCESS is followed inside, which is theoretically religion-free, or should be. A Jewish judge should be able to sit on the bench with In God We Trust on the wall and still be relied upon to dispense justice to the Hindu and Buddhist complainants--and if he can't, then it hardly matters if the courtroom is scrubbed clean of every religious symbol known to man. I don't much care what the outside looks like, I just want to be sure the people inside are adhering to the law--they can practice in a cathedral for all I care, as long as the rule of law is scrupulously followed.
 
2012-12-02 03:13:55 AM  

log_jammin: Valiente: Now, get "In God We Trust" off your fecking money, and you'll be able to take a few more steps away from ignorance.

yes. such a major issue...


Hey, you got your church in your state, buddy, not me. It's why some call America "Fat Iran".
 
2012-12-02 03:14:22 AM  
Am I the only one who is ticked off at this guy because he missed an opportunity to do something artsy with their display spots. (A chance that only comes ONCE a year.) Fine, you don't want to do a Nativity scene. Still, there are many families who like to look at the displays for art's sake. Much like the way even if you don't like Halloween, you can still get a kick at seeing how some people go all out on their costumes and decorating their front yard. So, why couldn't Vix do a lovely secular winter scene with Jack Frost and Frosty the Snowman or something similar and say that this way done by such and such Atheist group so all can enjoy it. But, no, Vix just puts up an ugly and very uncreative sign and displays dismissing religion all together. Way to win hearts and minds. I swear, this guy's people skills are of that of a worm. A dead worm.
 
2012-12-02 03:16:09 AM  

HotWingAgenda: Revek: And how is it that the guy who wants in god we trust off the money is any different from the guy who want the nativity scene off the public land. To me, Both assholes. These things don't force you to go to church. They don't force you to believe. If it offends the eye then do not look upon it, My eyes

They're only asking government officials to stop violating the 1st Amendment prohibition on the government respecting an establishment of religion. It's not about feelings, it's about adherence to the supreme law of the land. How can a non-Christian expect due process at a courthouse covered in Christian labeling? How can I have faith that my government has my best interests in mind, if its very money is printed with a slogan for a religious group that has historically tortured and persecuted members of other religions?


You shouldn't have to need faith. You should have law. And not the kind hallucinated out of a talking, flaming bush.

Sorry, I was distracted by thoughts of the most recent "hot redheads" thread.
 
2012-12-02 03:16:14 AM  

Revek: Lionel Mandrake: Revek: Atheist are trying to convince peaceful people who are not trying to knock on your door that they are right and theist are wrong without having any proof they are right. Sound familiar?

Where is this happening that you can't change the channel or put back the book or walk away from the asshole?

Revek: While you are worrying about them trying to take the science out of schools you should note they usually fail.

And "usually" is good enough for you? Maybe you also noticed that they never get up. And they'll keep on losing...until they win.

Yup its a average and averages are usually in the middle.


I don't know what that means.

But, I do know that you don't like to to answer questions directly.
 
2012-12-02 03:16:50 AM  

Revek: Lionel Mandrake: Revek: That you seek to tell us all how this unknown thing is this way rather than that way. In this respect you are identical to the theist. And how is it that the guy who wants in god we trust off the money is any different from the guy who want the nativity scene off the public land. To me, Both assholes. These things don't force you to go to church. They don't force you to believe. If it offends the eye then do not look upon it, My eyes see it all with equal doubt and I am not offended.

Boy, you like to generalize don't you?

Atheists are not trying to put non-science into science classes. They are not trying to put up monuments to E=mc2 or the laws of thermodynamics. Atheists do not knock on your door.

Everything an atheist does is easily not read, not watched, not listened to or walked away from.

Atheist are trying to convince peaceful people who are not trying to knock on your door that they are right and theist are wrong without having any proof they are right. Sound familiar? While you are worrying about them trying to take the science out of schools you should note they usually fail. On a bell curve atheist are at one end and the theist are at the other while most are somewhere in between. I find peace is usually in the middle.

/Salaam


At the other. Laughter OL.
 
2012-12-02 03:17:25 AM  

Valiente: log_jammin: Valiente: Now, get "In God We Trust" off your fecking money, and you'll be able to take a few more steps away from ignorance.

yes. such a major issue...

Hey, you got your church in your state, buddy, not me. It's why some call America "Fat Iran".


I've never heard it called that.

And whoever did call it that is a farking idiot.
 
2012-12-02 03:17:32 AM  

Ryker's Peninsula: Just get a regular Nativity Scene diorama, and replace all of the people with those little bottles of booze they give you on the airplane.
Jack Daniels makes for the best baby Jebus.


That scene would last about 30 seconds...if any Farkers were around, that is.
 
2012-12-02 03:17:49 AM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: jaylectricity: MaudlinMutantMollusk: that one's the wurst

Ugh.

Really.... I never sausage a thing


It does look yummy though, sitting there bacon in the oven.
 
2012-12-02 03:19:01 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: Chances are you did that stuff in church or at your house. Nobody says you shouldn't.

But the 1st Amendment is simple: if Christians get to put up their stuff on PUBLIC PROPERTY, then so does everyone else.

It's very simple. All or nothing.


Yeah I get that. But I also think it's a simplistic and...um...cold? way of looking at it. Putting up an "atheist display" that says "There is no God or heaven" is incredibly dark to somebody that needs to believe that, or using your display to shiat on the nativity scene next door. I guess what I'd be happy with is saying you can put up whatever you want as long as it's not negative or some such thing. Do you see what I'm driving at? I don't want special rights for the Christians or anybody else, but I don't want to see a bunch of people being assholes to each other under the guise of fairness or justice or equal rights either.
 
2012-12-02 03:20:45 AM  

PhiloeBedoe: What's Anti-Nativity mean? Three dumb women travel to see a dying old man and steal sh*t from him?


Coat hanger abortion in the stable, the wise men cheering on Joseph.

/oddly enough, there's still lots of myrrhr
 
2012-12-02 03:21:04 AM  

WorldCitizen: Put up all the nativity scenes you want on church or private property. It's easy.

Most people wanting to put them up on government property are probably the same who believe government is bad. Get off the government teat and put them up on your own or your church's property.


The venn diagram showing the intersection of people who complain about how the government should stay out of their personal business, the people who think the government should mind other people's personal business and the people who think the government should be a promoter of and enforcer for their religious beliefs and morals is very compacted. And depressing.
 
2012-12-02 03:21:32 AM  

Valiente: You shouldn't have to need faith. You should have law.


I agree wholeheartedly, with the caveat that a democracy (even if it's just a representational republic like ours) withers and dies if the populace does not have faith in the regime. Our government can only continue to survive as long as everyone subscribes to its mechanisms and feels like it is working for their benefit, and not just for the benefit of one faction.
 
2012-12-02 03:21:43 AM  

Eddie Ate Dynamite: Lionel Mandrake: Chances are you did that stuff in church or at your house. Nobody says you shouldn't.

But the 1st Amendment is simple: if Christians get to put up their stuff on PUBLIC PROPERTY, then so does everyone else.

It's very simple. All or nothing.

Yeah I get that. But I also think it's a simplistic and...um...cold? way of looking at it. Putting up an "atheist display" that says "There is no God or heaven" is incredibly dark to somebody that needs to believe that, or using your display to shiat on the nativity scene next door. I guess what I'd be happy with is saying you can put up whatever you want as long as it's not negative or some such thing. Do you see what I'm driving at? I don't want special rights for the Christians or anybody else, but I don't want to see a bunch of people being assholes to each other under the guise of fairness or justice or equal rights either.


I see. And who decides what makes something "negative" or "dark?"

A crucifix is pretty dark
 
2012-12-02 03:21:55 AM  

Valiente: Hey, you got your church in your state, buddy, not me. It's why some call America "Fat Iran".


what the hell are you talking about?
 
2012-12-02 03:23:57 AM  

Eddie Ate Dynamite: Lionel Mandrake: Chances are you did that stuff in church or at your house. Nobody says you shouldn't.

But the 1st Amendment is simple: if Christians get to put up their stuff on PUBLIC PROPERTY, then so does everyone else.

It's very simple. All or nothing.

Yeah I get that. But I also think it's a simplistic and...um...cold? way of looking at it. Putting up an "atheist display" that says "There is no God or heaven" is incredibly dark to somebody that needs to believe that, or using your display to shiat on the nativity scene next door. I guess what I'd be happy with is saying you can put up whatever you want as long as it's not negative or some such thing. Do you see what I'm driving at? I don't want special rights for the Christians or anybody else, but I don't want to see a bunch of people being assholes to each other under the guise of fairness or justice or equal rights either.


Didn't anyone read TFA? The whole reason these "anti-nativity" displays are coming up is because the polite approach (you know, lawsuits to have the nativity removed from public land) was tried and failed.

Thus were secular proponents forced to proceed to reductio ad absurdum. 

If the christians had just taken their displays away when they were asked nicely, the mocking would be unnecessary.
 
2012-12-02 03:24:06 AM  

Eddie Ate Dynamite: Lionel Mandrake: Chances are you did that stuff in church or at your house. Nobody says you shouldn't.

But the 1st Amendment is simple: if Christians get to put up their stuff on PUBLIC PROPERTY, then so does everyone else.

It's very simple. All or nothing.

Yeah I get that. But I also think it's a simplistic and...um...cold? way of looking at it. Putting up an "atheist display" that says "There is no God or heaven" is incredibly dark to somebody that needs to believe that, or using your display to shiat on the nativity scene next door. I guess what I'd be happy with is saying you can put up whatever you want as long as it's not negative or some such thing. Do you see what I'm driving at? I don't want special rights for the Christians or anybody else, but I don't want to see a bunch of people being assholes to each other under the guise of fairness or justice or equal rights either.


Then they'd just complain that you're infringing on their right to tell you how you're going to suffer and roast for eternity for being such a sinful scumbag.
 
2012-12-02 03:24:46 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: I see. And who decides what makes something "negative" or "dark?"

A crucifix is pretty dark



Maybe lighten up the mood with a noose and a guillotine?
 
2012-12-02 03:24:56 AM  

Spartan_Manhandler: omgwtfetc: Living in Canada, when I (rarely) happen to mention to a religious person that I don't believe there is a God I don't get more than a "meh", so I don't understand why some atheists in the US seem to be so aggressive. But what I understand even less is the attitude that a lot of religious people in the States seem to have towards atheists. If you honestly believe that here is a God who loves you and will accept you into Heaven, but will send all these dirty non-believers to Hell, where is all the anger coming from? Shouldn't there be more pity than condescension, more love than hate? I know that if I believed I knew the ultimate nature of the Universe I'd feel a lot more secure. So... what's up with that?

Christians in America actively lobby the goverment to take freedoms away from other people to force them to follow what Christians believe is their god's laws. They use tax-free money to do this. What's not to love?


This pisses me off. Religion and gov't should be separate. None of them should get tax exemptions or special rights; this would solve a lot of isues.
If you want to set up a display on private property have at it. Jesus wasn't born this time of year but whatever.
I'd like to get all canned holiday music banned. That sh*t makes me want to kick elves.
 
2012-12-02 03:25:44 AM  
The religious groups sued when their displays were taken down as the "nothing" approach in "all or nothing". It's just not fair that we can't promote our religion on public space!
 
2012-12-02 03:26:23 AM  

Kurmudgeon: What city and how did their officials do in the last election?
/just curious


This is in Santa Monica, CA. No idea how the city politics play out. It was all over the news a week or so ago when the city announced they decided it was too much hassle, and wouldn't let anyone put up anything on city property, and then were immediately sued by the Christian groups who claimed they had a right to put up nativity scenes on public property.

So basically, for the last 50 years the city let the religious groups put up nativity scenes. After pressure from atheist and non-Christian groups, the city held a lottery last year for the spaces. The Christian groups got upset, and at least one sued, because they only got to put up 1/3rd the number of nativities scenes as they wanted. So this year the city says, "We're tired of this shiat, so you know what, we're just going to not let anyone put anything up on city property", and the Christian groups immediately sue and make the talk show circuit whining about how they are being oppressed.
 
2012-12-02 03:29:32 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: I see. And who decides what makes something "negative" or "dark?"

A crucifix is pretty dark


Being told you're going to spend an eternity burning in a lake of fire if you don't believe in a 2,000 year old book, seems pretty dark and negative to me.
 
2012-12-02 03:30:12 AM  

Eddie Ate Dynamite: I guess what I'd be happy with is saying you can put up whatever you want as long as it's not negative or some such thing.


Which in itself is another problem I guess. You don't (and shouldn't) have the right to not be offended. And I'm generally against legislating morality. I don't know man..just...EVERYBODY LOVE EVERYBODY GOD DAMMIT.

I think what we need is a Santa-bot that murders anybody who deliberately acts like an asshole during the month of December.

Putting up displays to make Christians feel like shiat? .50 cal to the face
Passive-aggressive biatchiness to your son-in-law because he's not a billionaire hedge-fund manager? Garroted while checking on the turkey
Not waving at the guy for letting you into traffic? A-10 strafing run

I want to see forced smiles and warm-wishes through gritted teeth and a palpable sense of terror at any social contact for fear of getting gakked because you inadvertently slipped back into being an asshole before Jan 1.
 
2012-12-02 03:31:48 AM  

Eddie Ate Dynamite: Eddie Ate Dynamite: I guess what I'd be happy with is saying you can put up whatever you want as long as it's not negative or some such thing.

Which in itself is another problem I guess. You don't (and shouldn't) have the right to not be offended. And I'm generally against legislating morality. I don't know man..just...EVERYBODY LOVE EVERYBODY GOD DAMMIT.

I think what we need is a Santa-bot that murders anybody who deliberately acts like an asshole during the month of December.

Putting up displays to make Christians feel like shiat? .50 cal to the face
Passive-aggressive biatchiness to your son-in-law because he's not a billionaire hedge-fund manager? Garroted while checking on the turkey
Not waving at the guy for letting you into traffic? A-10 strafing run

I want to see forced smiles and warm-wishes through gritted teeth and a palpable sense of terror at any social contact for fear of getting gakked because you inadvertently slipped back into being an asshole before Jan 1.


4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-12-02 03:32:05 AM  

Errk: Pork....

[thechive.files.wordpress.com image 500x375]


NOT KOSHER
 
2012-12-02 03:33:05 AM  
Some of these so called "Atheists" need to chill the f*ck out. I'm an atheist, and I also believe in the philosophy of live and let live. Putting up decorations does not hurt me. Inventing holidays that are celebrated by giving gifts means I get to get and give gifts. Wheeee! What fun! And holidays, for whatever reason, are often cause for drinking and making merry. I'm all for that! So, chill out and let people believe what they want so long as it doesn't actually cause harm to somebody else. Aside from a hangover ;)
 
2012-12-02 03:34:45 AM  

ShawnDoc: Lionel Mandrake: I see. And who decides what makes something "negative" or "dark?"

A crucifix is pretty dark

Being told you're going to spend an eternity burning in a lake of fire if you don't believe in a 2,000 year old book, seems pretty dark and negative to me.


Yeah but these are both way separate issues. A crucifix isn't party of a nativity scene, and as far as I remember aren't part of any Christmas displays, if they are that's pretty farked up. The cross is for Easter. And the whole judging thing and telling people they're going to hell if they don't believe is pretty dark and isn't something that should be done, and should not be a part of a Christmas display or message. It's wrong when either side acts like a biatch, whether it's legal or not.
 
2012-12-02 03:37:55 AM  
Sadly by banning all displays, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, complete with scary meatball eyes gets banned too.
 
2012-12-02 03:38:54 AM  
If atheists are going to be such PITAs, they're no better than the fundie, evangelical, charismatic, pentacostal assholes they look down upon. I can't be the only one who thinks their all boobies for tactics like these, can I? Besides, Christmas is a federal holiday, so it's not like it's all that religious anymore anyway.
 
2012-12-02 03:39:15 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: Revek: Lionel Mandrake: Revek: Atheist are trying to convince peaceful people who are not trying to knock on your door that they are right and theist are wrong without having any proof they are right. Sound familiar?

Where is this happening that you can't change the channel or put back the book or walk away from the asshole?

Revek: While you are worrying about them trying to take the science out of schools you should note they usually fail.

And "usually" is good enough for you? Maybe you also noticed that they never get up. And they'll keep on losing...until they win.

Yup its a average and averages are usually in the middle.

I don't know what that means.

But, I do know that you don't like to to answer questions directly.


Oh it was a direct answer but you are to far to one side of the problem to see it. Try this 'specific boy' live and let live. don't rock the boat. chill out. Don't get your panties in a wad. turn the other cheek. Find something else to worry about like that male pattern baldness or the ozone layer.  And for your obviously comprehension deprived brain. Try not to be so butthurt that the majority don't have a problem with a fantasy of the origin of one their symbols being displayed on public land.
 
2012-12-02 03:39:35 AM  
What's the under/over on how many more times this story gets green-lit?
 
2012-12-02 03:41:07 AM  

Eddie Ate Dynamite: (holy-day, by the way, religion is sorta the reason you have the day off) t


Nah. It was because of a bunch of rich treasonists that didn't want to pay taxes.
 
2012-12-02 03:41:33 AM  

Kevin72: Sadly by banning all displays, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, complete with scary delicious meatball eyes gets banned too.


FTFY.
 
2012-12-02 03:42:00 AM  

Revek: Try not to be so butthurt that the majority don't have a problem with a fantasy of the origin of one their symbols being displayed on public land.


then why are you so butthurt about people doing the exact same thing? because, again, that's all that happened.
 
2012-12-02 03:42:40 AM  

StoPPeRmobile: Eddie Ate Dynamite: (holy-day, by the way, religion is sorta the reason you have the day off) t

Nah. It was because of a bunch of rich treasonists that didn't want to pay taxes.


Ms. Stroud approves.

damox.com
 
2012-12-02 03:44:12 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: Eddie Ate Dynamite: Lionel Mandrake: Chances are you did that stuff in church or at your house. Nobody says you shouldn't.

But the 1st Amendment is simple: if Christians get to put up their stuff on PUBLIC PROPERTY, then so does everyone else.

It's very simple. All or nothing.

Yeah I get that. But I also think it's a simplistic and...um...cold? way of looking at it. Putting up an "atheist display" that says "There is no God or heaven" is incredibly dark to somebody that needs to believe that, or using your display to shiat on the nativity scene next door. I guess what I'd be happy with is saying you can put up whatever you want as long as it's not negative or some such thing. Do you see what I'm driving at? I don't want special rights for the Christians or anybody else, but I don't want to see a bunch of people being assholes to each other under the guise of fairness or justice or equal rights either.

I see. And who decides what makes something "negative" or "dark?"


The public as by tradition. If they think what you are doing is negative and dark, there's a good chance it is. And if they deem you a dick for doing such displays, there's also a good chance you are.

Why put up things that most people would see as instigating? Why not put up beautiful secular displays that all can enjoy? Instead of a Nativity scene, put up a scene from you favorite secular winter themed book, movie or painting. Something Jack Frost related from the recently released movie, Rise of the Guardians, would have won more kids' and parents' hearts than a simple banner condemning the displays that actually look like someone put some thought into it.
 
2012-12-02 03:45:59 AM  

JustTheTip: Well said! Liberty and political freedoms are like muscles, if you don't use them, they shrink and go away. Putting up an "Anti-Nativity" isn't the point in itself, it's the flexing of religious freedoms, and pushing back against encroachment by the followers of a particular religion.


Precisely.
 
2012-12-02 03:46:07 AM  

mekki: Am I the only one who is ticked off at this guy because he missed an opportunity to do something artsy with their display spots. (A chance that only comes ONCE a year.) Fine, you don't want to do a Nativity scene. Still, there are many families who like to look at the displays for art's sake. Much like the way even if you don't like Halloween, you can still get a kick at seeing how some people go all out on their costumes and decorating their front yard. So, why couldn't Vix do a lovely secular winter scene with Jack Frost and Frosty the Snowman or something similar and say that this way done by such and such Atheist group so all can enjoy it. But, no, Vix just puts up an ugly and very uncreative sign and displays dismissing religion all together. Way to win hearts and minds. I swear, this guy's people skills are of that of a worm. A dead worm.


Great idea. No snark, that is a creative and fun idea. One need not be raging killjoys to get their point across.

Or maybe they should have done something educational. And not an upside down cross or Darwin statue, as someone suggested. The cross is instigation, and people will tune you out - not good if you want people to be open to what you have to say. Not to mention you're turning Darwin into an idol, a symbol for your ideas.

Or if you want to instigate, put up signs with all those Bible passages about idolatry, and how a nativity scene could be construed as idolatry. Or post real Christian verses, about giving up all your possessions to follow Christ, rendering unto Caesar what is Caesar's, what you do to the least of men you do to Jesus, etc.
 
2012-12-02 03:47:54 AM  

feckingmorons: It is a a bit silly, having a religious display on public land is not prohibited,


Actually, it is. 1st Amendment, no promotion of any religion or religions by the government.
 
2012-12-02 03:50:02 AM  

log_jammin: Revek: Try not to be so butthurt that the majority don't have a problem with a fantasy of the origin of one their symbols being displayed on public land.

then why are you so butthurt about people doing the exact same thing? because, again, that's all that happened.


I'm not butthurt I'm a notorious troll having fun saying things I really believe to people who I know are not going to change their minds.

/Or as I like to call it insomnia theater.
//From one troll to another I shouldn't have to tell you this.
 
2012-12-02 03:50:29 AM  

Duck_of_Doom: Or if you want to instigate, put up signs with all those Bible passages about idolatry, and how a nativity scene could be construed as idolatry. Or post real Christian verses, about giving up all your possessions to follow Christ, rendering unto Caesar what is Caesar's, what you do to the least of men you do to Jesus, etc.


Or just a quote from the Treaty of Tripoli.

As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion . . .
 
2012-12-02 03:51:10 AM  

BSABSVR: Errk: Pork....

[thechive.files.wordpress.com image 500x375]

Why is there what appears to be a sedan on the right hand side of the nativity scene?


Didn't they all go in one Accord?
 
2012-12-02 03:52:09 AM  
Speaking as an atheist, I wish these uppity PITA atheists would get off of their high horses, shut the hell up and let Christians have their Nativity scenes if it makes them happy. Really, it doesn't offend me, or even hurt my sensitive widdle feewings in any way.

Merry Christmas if it applies to you.
Happy Hanukkah if you lean that way.
Have a joyous Ramadan if that's your thing.
And if you a FSM acolyte don't forget the parmesan.

Live and let live.
 
2012-12-02 03:52:58 AM  

headhurt: BSABSVR: Errk: Pork....

[thechive.files.wordpress.com image 500x375]

Why is there what appears to be a sedan on the right hand side of the nativity scene?

Didn't they all go in one Accord?


I just realized...it's a camel.
 
2012-12-02 03:53:54 AM  

HotWingAgenda: Or just a quote from the Treaty of Tripoli.

As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion . . .


See, great idea. They can title the display "The History Of Christmas In America". Include that, some quotes from Jefferson, the stuff about Christmas being banned by Puritans, Washington crossing the Delaware... Educational.
 
2012-12-02 03:56:57 AM  

Yoyo: If atheists are going to be such PITAs, they're no better than the fundie, evangelical, charismatic, pentacostal assholes they look down upon. I can't be the only one who thinks their all boobies for tactics like these, can I? Besides, Christmas is a federal holiday, so it's not like it's all that religious anymore anyway.


Correct. It was never even a federal holiday until President Grant noted that there was so much absenteeism from federal workers that it may as well be a day off for all.
 
2012-12-02 03:57:02 AM  

Revek: I'm not butthurt I'm a notorious troll having fun saying things I really believe to people who I know are not going to change their minds.


Very odd definition of "troll"

Revek: //From one troll to another I shouldn't have to tell you this.


Not a troll. I like to smack a troll around sometimes, but all my comments are sincere.
 
2012-12-02 04:05:52 AM  

Drunk Astronaut: Speaking as an atheist, I wish these uppity PITA atheists would get off of their high horses, shut the hell up and let Christians have their Nativity scenes if it makes them happy.


No one is saying they can't have them. They want them removed from public buildings. You know, those building built with tax money and are used by the government. Or, they want public buildings open to all holiday displays from all religions, including those without religion.

How hard is that to understand?
 
2012-12-02 04:05:58 AM  

Drunk Astronaut: Merry Christmas if it applies to you.
Happy Hanukkah if you lean that way.
Have a joyous Ramadan if that's your thing.
And if you a FSM acolyte don't forget the parmesan.


You're a few months late for Ramadan, and it's a while before Eid-al-Ahda.

Bountiful Kwanzaa if you like that sort of thing.
Festive Solstice if you swing that way too.

/I'm just waiting for January to roll around, so we can all get slammed to honor Janus.
 
2012-12-02 04:06:10 AM  
The real miracle is that a woman married to a construction worker tald him a, the kid wasn't his, and b, she was still a virgin, and not only kept her teeth but got him to believe her. Then again, maybe old Yusef had spent a few too many years working in the sun.
 
2012-12-02 04:06:52 AM  

This About That: An anti-Nativity scene would be a lean-to where animals bleat, shiat, smell, and eat hay from the manger.

// Where can I get some "barn smell" scent spray?


don't use that chemical spray for gosh sake! it's no good for you. just take a walk, most people do not clean up after their pets (they are horrible people who will burn in hell for their sins). just scoop up some of the Real McCoy in a plastic bag and toss it right in the display. the Devil's in the details, mate!
 
2012-12-02 04:07:33 AM  
I find it ironic that the people complaining that the atheists in question are assholes are themselves assholes.
 
2012-12-02 04:08:31 AM  
Those displays were annoying.
 
2012-12-02 04:08:46 AM  

scalpod: L.D. Ablo: I'd sure like to put up a display for Eris and hand out free hot dogs on Fridays.

Maybe a monument to the Original Snub?


Golden apples for all!

Not that Discordianism is a real religion. It's just a joke. Right?
 
2012-12-02 04:11:40 AM  
Do Scientologists celebrate X-mas, or do they have their own winter holiday?

/and why isn't "scientologist" in the Google Chrome dictionary?
 
2012-12-02 04:15:15 AM  

Revek: Oh it was a direct answer but you are to far to one side of the problem to see it.


Yes. I'm far on the side of equal access to Constitutional rights. Guilty

Try this 'specific boy' live and let live. don't rock the boat. chill out. Don't get your panties in a wad. turn the other cheek. Find something else to worry about like that male pattern baldness or the ozone layer. And for your obviously comprehension deprived brain. Try not to be so butthurt that the majority don't have a problem with a fantasy of the origin of one their symbols being displayed on public land.

Look at that. And you complain about other people having their panties in a wad? Other people being butthurt? I think maybe you're the asshole that pisses you off.After an insult-laden rant like that, I don't think you're in a good position to complain about how atheists behave.

Live and let live means letting the atheists have their say along with everyone else's. If they annoy you, walk away. That's what I do when annoying people are annoying me by being annoying.
 
2012-12-02 04:17:36 AM  

Drunk Astronaut: Speaking as an atheist, I wish these uppity PITA atheists would get off of their high horses, shut the hell up and let Christians have their Nativity scenes if it makes them happy.


There are plenty of places on private property to do just that.

Knock yourselves out.
 
2012-12-02 04:18:08 AM  

log_jammin: Revek: I'm not butthurt I'm a notorious troll having fun saying things I really believe to people who I know are not going to change their minds.

Very odd definition of "troll"

Revek: //From one troll to another I shouldn't have to tell you this.

Not a troll. I like to smack a troll around sometimes, but all my comments are sincere.


A true troll instinctively know what will evoke a response from another. Every thing I said in this thread was sincere. I believe that everything is at its best when it is in balance. Atheist and theist and I have called myself both with sincerity are the easiest to troll. By troll? I mean to invoke their passionate disagreement in hope I can show how they are both wrong. You however recognize that both arguments are the same and equal. You do not however recognize the truth that the guy in the middle while equally sincere is just as unfortunately equal. I have no doubt that most people are sincere in their beliefs and express them as such. I just want everyone to understand that no matter what they should tolerate others if the expect to be tolerated..
 
2012-12-02 04:20:03 AM  
I hate, loath, and despise christmas. But, nativity scenes on public land do not bother me in the least bit. I just ignore them. Nor do I see them as an endorsement of christianity. I see them as an endorsement of christmas. Yeah, yeah, the name "christ" appears in christmas, but to me the holiday has always been more about kindness, good cheer, and being nice to each other. The whole jesus thing secondary to this. But, I have to say that I do approve of the idea for others to request to put up displays on public land. Everyone has the same rights.
 
2012-12-02 04:21:42 AM  
I want to see someone put up a display of a migrant worker picking crops or an illegal immigrant washing dishes. I would find that very funny.
 
2012-12-02 04:23:31 AM  

Mock26: I want to see someone put up a display of a migrant worker picking crops or an illegal immigrant washing dishes. I would find that very funny.


27.media.tumblr.com
 
2012-12-02 04:24:58 AM  

ShawnDoc: and the Christian groups immediately sue and make the talk show circuit whining about how they are being oppressed


Yes, most people get upset when their freedom of speech and expression are curtailed.
Oh well, that's California, they do what they do.
 
2012-12-02 04:25:43 AM  
Out of curiosity, how much land did these things take up in the public park(s)? Were the 21 lots so big that they made the park all buy unusable?
 
2012-12-02 04:26:14 AM  

Mock26: I want to see someone put up a display of a migrant worker picking crops or an illegal immigrant washing dishes. I would find that very funny.


See that's trolling and sincere.
 
2012-12-02 04:26:15 AM  

Revek: I believe that everything is at its best when it is in balance.


Right. No religious displays on public land. This includes everyone. How do you get more balanced than that?

There's one and only one other way that's balanced: everyone gets to put up religious displays on public property.

I'm good either way, but I think the "nobody" option would be waaaayy easier.
 
2012-12-02 04:28:00 AM  
Anti-Nativity? Would that be a N.I.B.?
 
2012-12-02 04:29:12 AM  

Revek: A true troll instinctively know what will evoke a response from another. Every thing I said in this thread was sincere. I believe that everything is at its best when it is in balance. Atheist and theist and I have called myself both with sincerity are the easiest to troll. By troll? I mean to invoke their passionate disagreement in hope I can show how they are both wrong. You however recognize that both arguments are the same and equal. You do not however recognize the truth that the guy in the middle while equally sincere is just as unfortunately equal. I have no doubt that most people are sincere in their beliefs and express them as such. I just want everyone to understand that no matter what they should tolerate others if the expect to be tolerated..


Ok. I've read this about 8 times now and I have no clue what it is you are trying to say. The only thing I can come up with is that alcohol is involved.
 
2012-12-02 04:31:33 AM  

mutterfark: Anti-Nativity? Would that be a N.I.B.?

In a 1992 interview, Geezer Butler states that the title simply refers to Bill Ward's goatee at the time, which the rest of the band thought was shaped like a pen nib; also referred to as nibby.[2] Apparently, Geezer Butler said: "Originally it was Nib, which was Bill's beard. When I wrote N.I.B., I couldn't think of a title for the song, so I just called it Nib, after Bill's beard. To make it more intriguing I put punctuation marks in there to make it N.I.B. By the time it got to America, they translated it to Nativity In Black."

 
2012-12-02 04:31:53 AM  
Found this over at another site:


A lawyer representing a group of churches that appears to have lost their bid to continue a nearly 60-year-old tradition of hosting a Nativity scene at a park in the beach city of Santa Monica, Calif., says the battle to preserve Christmas displays in the national public square has been lost.

"When [Monday] (11/19/2012), United States District Court Judge Audrey B Collins delivered a 28-page ruling denying my client the right to continue a 59-year-old tradition of exhibiting Nativity scenes along Ocean Boulevard in the City of Santa Monica this Christmas season, another dagger plunged into the heart of America's twilight customs and traditions. The sneered-at 'war on Christmas' was effectively lost for good," wrote William J. Becker, Jr., of The Becker Law Firm, in an article.

A controversy over the display about the birth of Jesus at Palisades Park erupted last Christmas season when an atheist group "manipulated" the city's lottery system for spaces, according to the Santa Monica Nativity Scene Committee, resulting in only two booths for the Christian group that normally uses 14 booths for the various Nativity-related scenes.

Last Monday, Judge Audrey B. Collins denied a request from the committee to erect the large displays, primarily on the grounds that the city's administration was overburdened with the permit process for the displays, according to Becker. A temporary injunction to allow the displays to go up this Christmas season was not allowed.

Becker wrote in his article that the case has not been dismissed (at least not yet), but it appears that an upcoming hearing on Dec. 3 will be about a motion to dismiss the lawsuit against the city of Santa Monica.

"As lead counsel for the Santa Monica Nativity Scenes Committee, a nonprofit made up of local churches and the police union, it is not my intention to surrender the cause," he states. "But the legal theories we presented to support the preservation of the Nativity tradition in Santa Monica and which the court rejected in their entirety are the identical legal theories advanced in opposition to the City's motion to dismiss ... I lack the cheery optimism (or delusional hope) the trend will somehow magically reverse course, carrying us safely back to dock in the port of redemption. I fancy myself an able advocate, not a miracle worker."

Hunter Jameson, head of the Nativity scene committee, told The Christian Post on Monday that it is a shame that the atheist activist group swayed the city to eliminate the tradition.

"It's a very sad day when a small number of people with an axe to grind, people who do not like Christianity, and who do not like God, are able to prevail by manipulating rules to censor our message from the public place where it has been displayed for the enjoyment of millions of people for nearly 60 years," Jameson said.

"It's even sadder that a city government would allow itself to go along with this effort to try to snuff out a message that a small group of people did not agree with," Jameson added.

The group's lawyer summed up: "Traditions like the Nativity displays in Palisades Park Traditions like the Nativity displays in Palisades Park, religious tolerance and common sense can always look to tomorrow. But, I fear, in my naïve way, not before the gravitational pull of society's regressive 'progressive' movement has tired of battle." 



There is some mighty fine derp in there, especially the dagger comment.
 
2012-12-02 04:32:40 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: Revek: I believe that everything is at its best when it is in balance.

Right. No religious displays on public land. This includes everyone. How do you get more balanced than that?

There's one and only one other way that's balanced: everyone gets to put up religious displays on public property.

I'm good either way, but I think the "nobody" option would be waaaayy easier.


I am sure that some christians would say that no display supports atheism!
 
2012-12-02 04:33:57 AM  

Mock26: I am sure that some christians would say that no display supports atheism!


heh...I've heard far more ridiculous things from the religious right.
 
2012-12-02 04:35:50 AM  
People on fark drinking... Never! However going with long tradition that I understand you but you don't understand me answer this first and I will unpack that statement to your hearts desire.

Not a troll. I like to smack a troll around sometimes, but all my comments are sincere.

How exactly do you smack around a troll? If they are truly trolling how do you piss on their parade, prove them wrong or otherwise do anything to smack them other than not respond.
 
2012-12-02 04:37:37 AM  
Goddamn atheists.
 
2012-12-02 04:43:18 AM  
As a Christian, I think the right decision was made. There should be nothing allowed on public property. In fact, I can't remember the last time I saw a nativity scene on public property in and around where I live.

Stop fighting the atheists please. If you really wanted to piss them off, instruct every one of your church members to erect a nativity scene on their property as close to whatever road you live on. If you live in an apartment, maybe you can tape the scene to a big window or your front door.

Really though, relax everyone. God is just creating these situations to sort it all out and draw out the believers and non-believers for Armageddon which he has to get done on the 21st of December because he doesn't want to make the Mayans look bad because they were righteous God fearing people..or something
 
2012-12-02 04:43:28 AM  

Drunk Astronaut: Speaking as an atheist, I wish these uppity PITA atheists would get off of their high horses, shut the hell up and let Christians have their Nativity scenes if it makes them happy.


Sorry, it's usually the Christians who get a bug up their ass whenever someone else comes along. You've got some serious gall to suggest that someone demanding that the First Amendment be respected is up on a high horse and that they should just "shut the hell up" (irony, considering this is the First Amendment at issue.)

Really, it doesn't offend me, or even hurt my sensitive widdle feewings in any way.

You wouldn't get offended that someone demands you be silenced because they don't like you? Cause that's what happens at damn near every one of these incidents and it's usually always the Christian groups biatching.
 
2012-12-02 04:44:12 AM  

Revek: How exactly do you smack around a troll? If they are truly trolling how do you piss on their parade, prove them wrong or otherwise do anything to smack them other than not respond.


It's easy actually. you just use their words against them, until they get caught in a trap of their own doing. At that point they usually slink away.
 
2012-12-02 04:44:46 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: mutterfark: Anti-Nativity? Would that be a N.I.B.?

In a 1992 interview, Geezer Butler states that the title simply refers to Bill Ward's goatee at the time, which the rest of the band thought was shaped like a pen nib; also referred to as nibby.[2] Apparently, Geezer Butler said: "Originally it was Nib, which was Bill's beard. When I wrote N.I.B., I couldn't think of a title for the song, so I just called it Nib, after Bill's beard. To make it more intriguing I put punctuation marks in there to make it N.I.B. By the time it got to America, they translated it to Nativity In Black."


Thanks for ruining my already weak joke.:b (but thanks for a cool bit of rock trivia:D)
 
2012-12-02 04:47:35 AM  
There was a group locally that was going for something like this. People who get tired of hearing about God and then press their beliefs on others don't realize they are the opposite of the same coin.
 
2012-12-02 04:49:06 AM  

Mock26: Lionel Mandrake: Revek: I believe that everything is at its best when it is in balance.

Right. No religious displays on public land. This includes everyone. How do you get more balanced than that?

There's one and only one other way that's balanced: everyone gets to put up religious displays on public property.

I'm good either way, but I think the "nobody" option would be waaaayy easier.

I am sure that some christians would say that no display supports atheism!


You sir know just what to say to keep them going.
 
2012-12-02 04:49:58 AM  

publikenemy: Stop fighting the atheists please. If you really wanted to piss them off, instruct every one of your church members to erect a nativity scene on their property as close to whatever road you live on. If you live in an apartment, maybe you can tape the scene to a big window or your front door.


That wouldn't piss off any atheists. In fact, that's the goal. The whole point is to keep it on private property. Then put up whatever you want and as much as you want. Do it year-round for all I care.
 
2012-12-02 04:50:19 AM  
Photoshop contest?
 
2012-12-02 04:52:25 AM  

log_jammin: Revek: How exactly do you smack around a troll? If they are truly trolling how do you piss on their parade, prove them wrong or otherwise do anything to smack them other than not respond.

It's easy actually. you just use their words against them, until they get caught in a trap of their own doing. At that point they usually slink away.


A troll cares nothing for traps or for how you use their words. They just want a response. They slink away because your boringly predictable.
 
2012-12-02 04:52:59 AM  

mutterfark: Thanks for ruining my already weak joke.:b (but thanks for a cool bit of rock trivia:D)


I really couldn't make it any lamer, so tried to make everyone feel better after reading it with a little factoid.

/
 
2012-12-02 04:54:13 AM  
Xmas.

That is all.
 
2012-12-02 04:58:14 AM  

Revek: A troll cares nothing for traps or for how you use their words. They just want a response. They slink away because your boringly predictable.


I'm fully aware of how trolls work and what they are after. why they end up slinking away is open to interpretation and depends on the troll.
 
2012-12-02 04:58:14 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: publikenemy: Stop fighting the atheists please. If you really wanted to piss them off, instruct every one of your church members to erect a nativity scene on their property as close to whatever road you live on. If you live in an apartment, maybe you can tape the scene to a big window or your front door.

That wouldn't piss off any atheists. In fact, that's the goal. The whole point is to keep it on private property. Then put up whatever you want and as much as you want. Do it year-round for all I care.


I know, I was being sarcastic. I really believe there is only a minuscule portion of Christians of any kind who would actually want to fight a fight like this. Most don't even go to church..cough..cough..(me)..and those that do, are too busy with their daily lives, as all of us are, to get aggressive about it.
 
2012-12-02 04:58:54 AM  
mutterfark:

That's a kick-ass vid, btw. The sound is excellent. I'll have to check out the whole concert.
 
2012-12-02 04:59:26 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: publikenemy: Stop fighting the atheists please. If you really wanted to piss them off, instruct every one of your church members to erect a nativity scene on their property as close to whatever road you live on. If you live in an apartment, maybe you can tape the scene to a big window or your front door.

That wouldn't piss off any atheists. In fact, that's the goal.



Dude, shhhhhh. Just tell them that the worst, most infuriating thing they can do is worship privately without involving our governmental institutions.
 
2012-12-02 05:01:42 AM  

publikenemy: Lionel Mandrake: publikenemy: Stop fighting the atheists please. If you really wanted to piss them off, instruct every one of your church members to erect a nativity scene on their property as close to whatever road you live on. If you live in an apartment, maybe you can tape the scene to a big window or your front door.

That wouldn't piss off any atheists. In fact, that's the goal. The whole point is to keep it on private property. Then put up whatever you want and as much as you want. Do it year-round for all I care.

I know, I was being sarcastic. I really believe there is only a minuscule portion of Christians of any kind who would actually want to fight a fight like this. Most don't even go to church..cough..cough..(me)..and those that do, are too busy with their daily lives, as all of us are, to get aggressive about it.


I took the last part as sarcasm, but that part seemed real...or more likely to be real, anyway.

Damn that Poe and Law!!
 
2012-12-02 05:02:45 AM  

log_jammin: Revek: A troll cares nothing for traps or for how you use their words. They just want a response. They slink away because your boringly predictable.

I'm fully aware of how trolls work and what they are after. why they end up slinking away is open to interpretation and depends on the troll.


I think the just get bored.
 
2012-12-02 05:05:33 AM  

Revek: I think the just get bored.


some do. Some end up contradicting themselves so badly they find they don't have an out. some just thread shiat and leave so they don't have to back up anything they say. some aren't trolls and are just really really stupid people who don't have a clue what thy are talking about.
 
2012-12-02 05:07:14 AM  

log_jammin: Revek: I think the just get bored.

some do. Some end up contradicting themselves so badly they find they don't have an out. some just thread shiat and leave so they don't have to back up anything they say. some aren't trolls and are just really really stupid people who don't have a clue what thy are talking about.


Wheres my contradiction or am I sincere?
 
2012-12-02 05:14:29 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: Lionel Mandrake: they never get up

never give up


I was gonna say... you want to see a religious man get up? Put an 8-year-old boy in the same room.

/I'm here all night.
 
2012-12-02 05:19:01 AM  
Atheists are the same as Westboro Baptist Church.
 
2012-12-02 05:19:58 AM  

Revek: Wheres my contradiction or am I sincere?


drunk.
 
2012-12-02 05:23:54 AM  

REO-Weedwagon: Atheists are the same as Westboro Baptist Church.


i159.photobucket.com
 
2012-12-02 05:26:17 AM  

log_jammin: Revek: Wheres my contradiction or am I sincere?

drunk.


You are! Me to.
How is being drunk a contradiction of anything I said tonight/this morning. Come on don't disappoint you have been doing so well.
 
2012-12-02 05:28:10 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: mutterfark:

That's a kick-ass vid, btw. The sound is excellent. I'll have to check out the whole concert.


Just a lucky find when I Googled NIB.
BTW I think the factoid is hilarious because my family moved from Cali to WV in '77 when I was 13 and everybody there saw Satanism under every rock song. Kiss was Knights In Satan's Service, etc. I was a long-haired kid from Hippyland and generally suspect so I was regularly informed of the threat to my everlasting soul.

OT...Was raised Catholic but I'm an atheist and frankly none of this seems worth the rise in blood pressure.
 
2012-12-02 05:28:33 AM  

Fibro: Lionel Mandrake: Lionel Mandrake: they never get up

never give up

I was gonna say... you want to see a religious man get up? Put an 8-year-old boy in the same room.

/I'm here all night.


You know that's funny. Even if you are boring intolerant atheist troll
 
2012-12-02 05:30:59 AM  

publikenemy: If you really wanted to piss them off, instruct every one of your church members to erect a nativity scene on their property as close to whatever road you live on. If you live in an apartment, maybe you can tape the scene to a big window or your front door.


Why the fark would we care what you do on your own property?
 
2012-12-02 05:33:14 AM  

Revek: How is being drunk a contradiction of anything I said tonight/this morning.


You being drunk doesn't contradict anything you've said. What is does do is make you difficult to understand what you are trying to say.
 
2012-12-02 05:33:21 AM  

JosephFinn: feckingmorons: It is a a bit silly, having a religious display on public land is not prohibited,

Actually, it is. 1st Amendment, no promotion of any religion or religions by the government.


Actually, the text of the First Amendment is:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

It's about creating laws. It says they can't make a law establishing a religion or a law banning it. Using the amendment as an excuse to push one agenda or another in the guise of "it offends me" has been taken to the ludicrous extreme that we see today. Arlington national cemetery is public land as well...guess what you'll see all over the place there. Public land does not necessarily in and of itself mean no religious symbols whatsoever...mostly because it can be argued that banning such promotes atheism and is prohibiting the free exercise of religion.

For legislators and the chief executive who swear an oath to God on a religious text when they take office, this kind of idiocy seems fairly...well...contrived.
 
2012-12-02 05:40:52 AM  

REO-Weedwagon: Atheists are the same as Westboro Baptist Church.


We are? But what do I put on the signs? 'THE UNIVERSE DOESN'T CARE IF YOU'RE GAY OR GET MARRIED AND NEITHER DO I'? And what kind of funerals am I supposed to show up at?
 
2012-12-02 05:48:00 AM  

craig328: It's about creating laws. It says they can't make a law establishing a religion or a law banning it. Using the amendment as an excuse to push one agenda or another in the guise of "it offends me" has been taken to the ludicrous extreme that we see today. Arlington national cemetery is public land as well...guess what you'll see all over the place there.


Graves marked with the religions of the people buried there. All of the religions. Including those with no religion.

Public land does not necessarily in and of itself mean no religious symbols whatsoever...mostly because it can be argued that banning such promotes atheism and is prohibiting the free exercise of religion.

Oh, look. Someone doesn't know the difference between secular and atheist. Typical whiny little God-botherer.
 
2012-12-02 05:56:10 AM  
Atheists can put up their atheistic displays on their national atheist holiday seasons.

Fairs fair
 
2012-12-02 06:01:54 AM  

log_jammin: Revek: How is being drunk a contradiction of anything I said tonight/this morning.

You being drunk doesn't contradict anything you've said. What is does do is make you difficult to understand what you are trying to say.


which part i;m not that drunk. What i'm saying is that all parties that is the for and against crowd are full of shiat. Sue to get your own useless display like in the article but be respectful instead of being an ass. if you don't really care that much about whether public land is used for impotent displays of something that can't be proved to have happened then just STFU. If you care that much then get out you wallet and prove your sincerity and create your own opinion how things are(you know that thing i call the universe but some call creation). But If your like me just ignore it all. There is a nativity scene less than 100 feet from me on public land. I drove by it at least 10 times today and I can't remember seeing once although i know its there. I think its a fairy tale personally but I would not try to talk anyone out of their belief in it. Having said that its still funny to watch the responses of people that believe they have a truth from a unknown and unknowable whether they are for it or against it. Go read this page Shouldn't take more than a week or two if you really wan't to understand what I believe. Of course I don't believe/agree with all of it just some(Its allowed) of it. You have to figure out which parts. Apathetic Agnostic
 
2012-12-02 06:04:31 AM  
This is why we can't have nice things.
 
2012-12-02 06:06:17 AM  
I am Jesus
 
2012-12-02 06:08:19 AM  
Imagine no religions, no Twinkies too!
 
2012-12-02 06:17:34 AM  

ransack.: I am Jesus


Go mow my lawn.... Dude
 
2012-12-02 06:22:53 AM  
Ah, Atheism. A religion just as arrogant, ignorant, and full of dickery as any other. Unfortunately, for a group of people with absolutely nothing to say, we sure hear a lot of it.
 
2012-12-02 06:23:31 AM  

omgwtfetc: I don't understand why some atheists in the US seem to be so aggressive.


Because the christian movement in the US can get very oppressive.

Here's a thread that made Fark.
Link

In a nutshell, atheists "unblessed" a highway, because when it was blessed, the prayer more or less asked for non-believers to be jailed or not allowed to enter town.

Ah, here's the part from the publicly posted prayer:
If they will not submit to God's way of living, then the prayer is to have them incarcerated or removed from the county. We prey for salvation of each person and the full knowledge of Jesus Christ as Savior.

Some backstory, See:
Some of their past behavior, such as having the police arrest atheists and forcibly remove them from town meetings(all for simply talking before the meeting was actually started), arresting an atheist with more than a dozen deputies dressed like SWAT....one who....tried to use the Freedom Of Information Act to see how legit the use of the sheriff department's credit card and on the clock sheriff deputies and other personnel to uproot and transfer tax-payer property (jail basketball goals) to eight area churches.....on a bogus felony charge because she put "Esq" on her name on the form.

From:
Link

See also:
http://free2think.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=1414

Same town. Sure, it's one of the worse examples, but the phenomenon is hardly rare. Lots of smaller towns still have that vibe of Dominionism going and or tend to favor christianity, not as a majority practicing, but as town and even state making actual allowances for(and against what the church dislikes). Just look at gay marriage laws, hell, even what kinds of consensual sex between consenting adults is illegal.

Is it any wonder that Atheists can get up in arms over the separation of church and state and lack therof? This is what can happen when that division is not maintained. Christians not only harassing atheists, but arresting and jailing them on trumped up charges.
 
2012-12-02 06:26:22 AM  

Terrible Old Man: Ah, Atheism. A religion just as arrogant, ignorant, and full of dickery as any other. Unfortunately, for a group of people with absolutely nothing to say, we sure hear a lot of it.


That was an awful lot of stupid packed into two brief sentences.
 
2012-12-02 06:30:28 AM  
*slinks away*
 
2012-12-02 06:33:37 AM  

Terrible Old Man: Ah, Atheism. A religion just as arrogant, ignorant, and full of dickery as any other. Unfortunately, for a group of people with absolutely nothing to say, we sure hear a lot of it.


1. Not a religion, more typically a lack of one.
2. Atheism =/= apathy or not caring. What we do care about is abuse of science, and abuse of other people, really, any rational human being should.

To remain apathetic in the case of what I posted above is just a smidge sociopathic, it may be a good idea for you to see a shrink.

Here's the thing about atheists. We don't hate groups of people for their religion. We hate individual assholes who go out of their way to argue against proven science, or try as hard as they can to make others conform or GTFO their town.

Sure, there are some legitimate assholes in any given gathering of people, though there is no reason for you all to go flaming bigot and pretend "they" are all alike.

/at least some of you found a way to feel superior to everyone else, religious or non-
 
2012-12-02 06:35:19 AM  

Terrible Old Man: Ah, Atheism. A religion just as arrogant, ignorant, and full of dickery as any other. Unfortunately, for a group of people with absolutely nothing to say, we sure hear a lot of it.




Anti-nativity scenes? Now it's willfully ignorant mithra/fertility goddess worshippers versus those oh so pleasant people who believe in nothing and never miss a chance to remind you about it.
 
2012-12-02 06:36:36 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: Terrible Old Man: Ah, Atheism. A religion just as arrogant, ignorant, and full of dickery as any other. Unfortunately, for a group of people with absolutely nothing to say, we sure hear a lot of it.

That was an awful lot of stupid packed into two brief sentences.


Well said. But...Poe's Law.

10/10 if that's the case.
 
2012-12-02 06:38:15 AM  

Jarhead_h: Terrible Old Man: Ah, Atheism. A religion just as arrogant, ignorant, and full of dickery as any other. Unfortunately, for a group of people with absolutely nothing to say, we sure hear a lot of it..


Applause.

Anti-nativity scenes? Now it's willfully ignorant mithra/fertility goddess worshippers versus those oh so pleasant people who believe in nothing and never miss a chance to remind you about it.

And all of it set to Bing farking Crosby.
 
2012-12-02 06:40:00 AM  

Valiente: Now, get "In God We Trust" off your fecking money, and you'll be able to take a few more steps away from ignorance.


www.hotlikesauce.com
 
2012-12-02 06:41:21 AM  
i18.photobucket.com
 
2012-12-02 06:42:30 AM  

Jarhead_h: Terrible Old Man: Ah, Atheism. A religion just as arrogant, ignorant, and full of dickery as any other. Unfortunately, for a group of people with absolutely nothing to say, we sure hear a lot of it.



Anti-nativity scenes? Now it's willfully ignorant mithra/fertility goddess worshippers versus those oh so pleasant people who believe in nothing and never miss a chance to remind you about it.


Atheism = belief in nothing

out-stupided only by:

Atheism = Satan worship
 
2012-12-02 06:55:12 AM  
www.iruntheinternet.com
 
2012-12-02 06:56:48 AM  
I'm an atheist who loves Christmas. F*cking jews. F*ck with your own holiday traditions.
 
2012-12-02 07:10:06 AM  

Waldo Pepper: just curious after reading the article, wouldn't an anti-christian display be hate speech and would not this be the government condoning hate towards christians?



Trolololol?
 
2012-12-02 07:11:50 AM  

mekki: The public as by tradition. If they think what you are doing is negative and dark, there's a good chance it is. And if they deem you a dick for doing such displays, there's also a good chance you are.


To many Christians, anything involving, mentioning, or implying Atheism is considered "dark". I could very easily imagine enough people of Santa Monica would complain about even a simple "Have a Happy Winter Solstice and Holiday Season from the Atheists of Santa Monica" display, because atheism is "dark: to them (not to mention not directly referencing Christmas), to cause a problem.

No, the Santa Monica government did the right thing. They tried to allow all equally, the atheists followed the rules, and then someone (most likely Christian, with the slim possibility of an atheist or other doing it to stir up the pot) couldn't accept that the atheists were given equal voice and vandalized their displays. So, this time the government very rightly decided that it would be easier for all concerned if they just put a blanket ban on displays on PUBLIC PROPERTY (emphasis, because many people seem to be missing this key point here). All are banned equally. NONE are banned from putting displays up on private property.

And yet, it is the Christians who are complaining that their rights are being infringed because they are not being accorded special privileges, but rather all are being treated equally under the law.

Ed Grubermann: How hard is that to understand?


There seem to be an incredibly large number of people in this thread who are missing the point, either deliberately or out of ignorance. I guess it's just much easier to complain about uppity atheists demanding equal application of the law. :-/
 
2012-12-02 07:13:27 AM  
Yeah! FARK hate speech thread on hate speech.
 
2012-12-02 07:14:30 AM  

Waldo Pepper: just curious after reading the article, wouldn't an anti-christian display be hate speech and would not this be the government condoning hate towards christians?

Vix's display included a quotation from Thomas Jefferson: "Religions are all alike - founded upon fables and mythologies."


OMG!! HATE SPEECH!!!
 
2012-12-02 07:15:23 AM  
When an Xtian tries to convert me or tell me I'm going to "Hell", is that "hate speech"? Not only are they disagreeing with my view of life and religion, they're threatening me with ETERNAL DAMNATION if I don't do what they say (and that's about the worst thing you can threaten someone with).

How is that acceptable, but freedom FROM that is "hate speech"? You farkers.
 
2012-12-02 07:15:43 AM  
whyismarko.com
 
2012-12-02 07:24:06 AM  
l1.yimg.com

All they do is put up signs? That's boring.
 
2012-12-02 07:27:27 AM  

RDixon: Xmas.

That is all.


I more or less despise Christianity, but even I have the courtesy of calling it "Christmas." "Xmas" to me has always come across as extremely petty and needlessly caustic unless the person using is it using it as a genuine abbreviation (which was common long before the "War on Christmas" was even a phrase).

There are many factual ways to irritate Christians if that's your thing, without resorting to denigrating their holiday. I irritate Christians frequently, but only via rebuttal to stupid claims on their part. But stooping to that as an insult is pretty damn douchey if you ask me.

/only celebrates Lord Kimbo Day
 
2012-12-02 07:28:40 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: The Supreme Court has ruled that when the government opens up public property to private citizens - when it creates a public forum for speech - it cannot discriminate in favor of some viewpoints and against others.


this is how the challenge for Citizens United should proceed. based upon this ruling. because when they said money=speech they themselves created a forum for speech that was inherently discriminatory on the basis of wealth.
 
2012-12-02 07:29:34 AM  
Christians have to draw athiests into a shiat fight or they'll just continue to sink into irrelevance.

Some ethos desperately need an enemy for their on existence to be meaningful.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-12-02 07:29:38 AM  

Revek: I think these assholes are the reason i finally deicded on Apatheism. They remind me of christian wingnuts. They only feel free if they are trying to tell other hows to be free.


That's the point. Give them a taste of their own medicine.
 
2012-12-02 07:36:23 AM  

Revek: That you seek to tell us all how this unknown thing is this way rather than that way. In this respect you are identical to the theist.


You're mistaken. Atheists don't give a fark what you believe or don't believe. They just want your religious bullshiat out of government and schools.

nmemkha:
I have no problem with tasteful and respectful holiday displays from any religion or group.


Neither do I. As long as they aren't on government property.

HotWingAgenda: Dude, shhhhhh. Just tell them that the worst, most infuriating thing they can do is worship privately without involving our governmental institutions.


Yeah, I'll tell you... what would really get my dander up is if I couldn't tell who believed in gods and who didn't. If all theists kept that shiat secret, and only prayed silently and privately?... man, that would drive me nuts. I'd feel like there were ninja-believers all around me, all the time. Shoot, I'd probably have to start believing in Jesus myself, I'd be so mad. Please Xians, continue to behave like whiny children every time someone challenges your infringement on the Establishment Clause, so I can continue hating the God that I secretly believe in deep down... I just don't know what I'd do if didn't have that fire to keep me warm at night.
 
2012-12-02 08:02:21 AM  
Atheism is a Religion.
 
2012-12-02 08:10:16 AM  
Its more than just a religious thing. Its cultural, traditional, and makes people feel good. the term militant atheist was coined because of people like this.
 
2012-12-02 08:11:10 AM  
That there is a dick move.


/yourenothelping.png/
 
2012-12-02 08:11:16 AM  
Atheism is srs business. They're passionate people, too!

They're passionate. They want you to know that.

What they say is important!! Listen.
 
2012-12-02 08:17:09 AM  

david_gaithersburg: Yeah! FARK hate speech thread on hate speech.


1/10 - Go 'way, puto.
 
2012-12-02 08:24:22 AM  
Theism is not a religion. Atheism is similarly NOT a religion. But it's trolltacular that so many think otherwise!
 
2012-12-02 08:25:27 AM  

fireclown: That there is a dick move.


I know, right?... If the Xians hadn't vandalized the other displays, everyone could have had their holiday fun. Now no one can. What a bunch of assholes.

letrole: Atheism is a Religion.


*Yawn*
 
2012-12-02 08:30:21 AM  
Maybe the government and states should stop with all the paid holidays. Don't like Christmas, New Year Day, Martin King Day etc. no big deal it is just another work day.
 
2012-12-02 08:32:03 AM  

jodaveki: Theism is not a religion. Atheism is similarly NOT a religion. But it's trolltacular that so many think otherwise!


yeah, and bald is not a hair color
 
2012-12-02 08:40:05 AM  
If someone happens to have no faith in a Creator, then the word 'atheist' is simply a descriptor or an attribute. Those who take on Atheist as an identity in itself can universally be regarded as smarmy, conceited, and belligerent tossers. This thread bears those facts out plainly.

The motivations for the Schoolboy Atheist are generally anger and resentment. Those who simply had no faith would have no interest in such discussions. It's safe to say that the common heathen just doesn't care -- but these lads here? They have serious mommy and daddy issues.
 
2012-12-02 08:41:16 AM  

Mock26: Lionel Mandrake: Revek: I believe that everything is at its best when it is in balance.

Right. No religious displays on public land. This includes everyone. How do you get more balanced than that?

There's one and only one other way that's balanced: everyone gets to put up religious displays on public property.

I'm good either way, but I think the "nobody" option would be waaaayy easier.

I am sure that some christians would say that no display supports atheism!


And indeed the fact that this city is going with the no display option had causes exactly that! Shocking!
 
2012-12-02 08:41:24 AM  

lordjupiter: When an Xtian tries to convert me or tell me I'm going to "Hell", is that "hate speech"? Not only are they disagreeing with my view of life and religion, they're threatening me with ETERNAL DAMNATION if I don't do what they say (and that's about the worst thing you can threaten someone with).

How is that acceptable, but freedom FROM that is "hate speech"? You farkers.


0/10
There was a shiat ton of wharrrrrgrrrbble on this thread. You win the prize for the most.
 
2012-12-02 08:47:36 AM  
Since Jesus was made up and given the green light by Constantine and Santa is another myth, the 25th of December should be celebrated because the sun sets 1 degree higher and the days start getting longer and the wolves go away.
 
2012-12-02 08:58:42 AM  
Active outspoken Atheist here.
I really don't like the anti-nativity scenes. I find them repulsive.
What atheists should put up isn't anti-christian scenes, but pro-freedom, happiness, family, and real rather than imagined goods.
 
2012-12-02 09:00:13 AM  
Remember, you owe your right to be an atheist douchebag to the tolerance of your Christian neighbors.
 
2012-12-02 09:00:28 AM  
Lionel Mandrake

Smartest
Funniest
2012-12-02 01:35:49 AM
The Supreme Court has ruled that when the government opens up public property to private citizens - when it creates a public forum for speech - it cannot discriminate in favor of some viewpoints and against others.

So, STFU about your oppression and the WAR ON CHRISTMAS™ and pack up your nativity scenes and take them somewhere private. I bet your church would let you set up a creche on their property. Why, I bet any number of individuals and businesses would gladly let you set up your displays on their property.

STOP SETTING THIS SHIAT UP ON PUBLIC PROPERTY


Grow the fark up.
 
2012-12-02 09:09:56 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: Revek: That you come in talking about how atheist don't do this or don't' do that but the truth is that they just do different asshole things.

For example?

Revek: I just simply don't care how wrong you are about the tendency of atheist to be just as uncompromising in their quest to be... Well assholes

When are atheists uncompromising?

When they demand that the Constitution be applied equally to all groups? When they fight to keep "Intelligent Design" out of science textbooks? When, like one guy sues over "In God We Trust" on the money? OK, that guy's an ass, but I happen to agree it doesn't belong there. Nevertheless, that is like ONE guy. Unless he's your neighbor or a relative, you can easily ignore the whole thing.

What exactly do atheistsChristians do but talk on a TV that you can turn off, and write books you don't have to buy, and chat in threads that you don't have to read?


see how that works both ways?
 
2012-12-02 09:10:56 AM  

Revek: Lionel Mandrake: Revek: That you come in talking about how atheist don't do this or don't' do that but the truth is that they just do different asshole things.

For example?

Revek: I just simply don't care how wrong you are about the tendency of atheist to be just as uncompromising in their quest to be... Well assholes

When are atheists uncompromising?

When they demand that the Constitution be applied equally to all groups? When they fight to keep "Intelligent Design" out of science textbooks? When, like one guy sues over "In God We Trust" on the money? OK, that guy's an ass, but I happen to agree it doesn't belong there. Nevertheless, that is like ONE guy. Unless he's your neighbor or a relative, you can easily ignore the whole thing.

What exactly do atheists do but talk on a TV that you can turn off, and write books you don't have to buy, and chat in threads that you don't have to read?

That you seek to tell us all how this unknown thing is this way rather than that way. In this respect you are identical to the theist. And how is it that the guy who wants in god we trust off the money is any different from the guy who want the nativity scene off the public land. To me, Both assholes. These things don't force you to go to church. They don't force you to believe. If it offends the eye then do not look upon it, My eyes see it all with equal doubt and I am not offended.


please someone get this man TF... oh wait.
 
2012-12-02 09:12:04 AM  

gadian: What happened to live and let live? All sorts of things go up on public land and I don't give a shiat. If I don't like the look of it, I don't look at it. Please don't fark up Christmas celebrations to a point to where no one gets the day off, guys.

/atheist
//If you take my Christmas day, I will CUT YOU!


So much THIS there is not enough THIS in THIS to express THIS
 
2012-12-02 09:13:42 AM  

Gyrfalcon: log_jammin: Just put Nativity scenes on church lawns and the issue goes away. why do they need to be anywhere else?

Thisitty this.

Although I do have to laugh (to myself) when I see Xmas trees alongside the traditional nativity scenes. I mean, do you people even realize....and then I say, no, no you do not.


of course they don't... you mean about it being a pagan symbol of course right? winter festival i think?
 
2012-12-02 09:14:46 AM  

signaljammer: I've always felt a little admiration for the Moslems' proscription on graven images. How soon archetypes become icons.


it's supposed to apply in Christianity as well... though most seem to simply disregard the inconvenient parts.
 
2012-12-02 09:16:12 AM  

Valiente: Now, get "In God We Trust" off your fecking money, and you'll be able to take a few more steps away from ignorance.


but of course... why didn't i see it before? it's always been those 3 little words that has kept the nation in ignorance... wow... you really opened my eyes... thank you so much.
 
2012-12-02 09:16:30 AM  

Gdalescrboz: Grow the fark up.


Yeah, he should be more like the religious people mentioned in TFA. Don't speak out against religion in government, or use the legal system to make sure the church and state stay separated, because that's childish.

Instead, just vandalize anything that upsets your particular traditions.
 
2012-12-02 09:18:52 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: Revek: That you seek to tell us all how this unknown thing is this way rather than that way. In this respect you are identical to the theist. And how is it that the guy who wants in god we trust off the money is any different from the guy who want the nativity scene off the public land. To me, Both assholes. These things don't force you to go to church. They don't force you to believe. If it offends the eye then do not look upon it, My eyes see it all with equal doubt and I am not offended.

Boy, you like to generalize don't you?

Atheists are not trying to put non-science into science classes. They are not trying to put up monuments to E=mc2 or the laws of thermodynamics. Atheists do not knock on your door.

Everything an atheist does is easily not read, not watched, not listened to or walked away from.


When did the Christians tie you up and strap you down and force feed their dogma to you? Did it look like this:

www.pbs.org
 
2012-12-02 09:20:59 AM  

HotWingAgenda: Revek: And how is it that the guy who wants in god we trust off the money is any different from the guy who want the nativity scene off the public land. To me, Both assholes. These things don't force you to go to church. They don't force you to believe. If it offends the eye then do not look upon it, My eyes

They're only asking government officials to stop violating the 1st Amendment prohibition on the government respecting an establishment of religion. It's not about feelings, it's about adherence to the supreme law of the land. How can a non-Christian expect due process at a courthouse covered in Christian labeling? How can I have faith that my government has my best interests in mind, if its very money is printed with a slogan for a religious group that has historically tortured and persecuted members of other religions?


ummmm.... I thought you were Athiest?
 
2012-12-02 09:22:01 AM  
Atheism is a religion too, so they should be banned.

I don't get why Atheists are so butt hurt all the time when they see...GASP...a religious display.
 
2012-12-02 09:23:00 AM  
So much effort to fight against something they don't believe in. Atheism is the real mental disorder, as this ridiculous story proves. No such thing as an atheist anyway. You have to know all there is to know to say for certain.

MENTAL DISORDER with a large amount of Narcissism.

Well done, atheists. You're creating stupid stuff to combat what you claim is stupid stuff. Instead of just letting people doing what they want, you know better. Yes, you are the champions.

So sad.
 
2012-12-02 09:23:13 AM  

JustTheTip: HotWingAgenda: Revek: And how is it that the guy who wants in god we trust off the money is any different from the guy who want the nativity scene off the public land. To me, Both assholes. These things don't force you to go to church. They don't force you to believe. If it offends the eye then do not look upon it, My eyes

They're only asking government officials to stop violating the 1st Amendment prohibition on the government respecting an establishment of religion. It's not about feelings, it's about adherence to the supreme law of the land. How can a non-Christian expect due process at a courthouse covered in Christian labeling? How can I have faith that my government has my best interests in mind, if its very money is printed with a slogan for a religious group that has historically tortured and persecuted members of other religions?

Well said! Liberty and political freedoms are like muscles, if you don't use them, they shrink and go away. Putting up an "Anti-Nativity" isn't the point in itself, it's the flexing of religious freedoms, and pushing back against encroachment by the followers of a particular religion.


Wait... now I am confused... I was under the impression that Athiesm is to religion what Bald is to hair color...
 
2012-12-02 09:24:23 AM  

Studson: lordjupiter: When an Xtian tries to convert me or tell me I'm going to "Hell", is that "hate speech"? Not only are they disagreeing with my view of life and religion, they're threatening me with ETERNAL DAMNATION if I don't do what they say (and that's about the worst thing you can threaten someone with).

How is that acceptable, but freedom FROM that is "hate speech"? You farkers.

0/10
There was a shiat ton of wharrrrrgrrrbble on this thread. You win the prize for the most.



Enjoy your "hell", dipshiat.
 
2012-12-02 09:25:41 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: Lionel Mandrake: they never get up

never give up


see.... now I have Aces High stuck in my head... damn u.
 
2012-12-02 09:26:33 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: inglixthemad: I always thought "E Pluribus Unum" made more sense on the money of a nation devoted to the theory of inclusion.

It was good enough for 180 years, but then...something something...and now people act like it was always "In God We Trust"


progress?
 
2012-12-02 09:26:36 AM  
And then Christians will overreact to the overreaction. Things will escalate, and eventually it will cause an amendment to the constitution naming a religion for the US. (I know you don't believe this, but some of the most religious people in this country are Birthers, they won't back down. Ever.)

So if everyone would calm the fark down. Christians stop being pricks. Atheists stop being pricks. Everyone just enjoy the holiday season.
 
2012-12-02 09:27:25 AM  

PhiloeBedoe: What's Anti-Nativity mean? Three dumb women travel to see a dying old man and steal sh*t from him?


You just wrote an epic comedy farce movie. The women can be played by Kristie Alley, Betty White, and Tina Fey. The old man can be played by Al Pacino. At the end of the movie, when he figures out what's going on, he goes all payback on them, with guns and car chases.
 
2012-12-02 09:30:43 AM  

Eddie Ate Dynamite: Lionel Mandrake: The Supreme Court has ruled that when the government opens up public property to private citizens - when it creates a public forum for speech - it cannot discriminate in favor of some viewpoints and against others.  

So, STFU about your oppression and the WAR ON CHRISTMAS™ and pack up your nativity scenes and take them somewhere private. I bet your church would let you set up a creche on their property. Why, I bet any number of individuals and businesses would gladly let you set up your displays on their property.

STOP SETTING THIS SHIAT UP ON PUBLIC PROPERTY

While this is all technically correct, I still find it a bit sad. I consider myself agnostic, but I still grew up in a church doing Christmas plays and what not. Nativity scenes are part and parcel of Christmas, just like a Christmas tree, egg nog, turkey and ham dinners, and Christmas music talking about Jesus. Perhaps some or all of these things don't apply to your Christmas, or maybe you don't celebrate or even recognize Christmas in any way, but that doesn't mean you have to be a dick about it.

Nativity scenes inspire warm feelings of remembrance and tradition in many people, and public grounds are a great place to put them because so many people can enjoy them in a common locale. Now the laws are correct, it wouldn't be right to allow a pro-Christ display without allowing an anti-Christ display as well. However I think there should also be some sort of a "don't be a farking asshole" law that judges the intent of such a display or something. A nativity scene is most likely meant to inspire and spread happiness and remembrance, whereas an anti-Christ display would most likely be intended to upset people, or at least not have warm-fuzzies as the reasoning behind it, arguments about indoctrination or whatever regarding a nativity scene aside.

Okay so religion has done a whole lot of bad things. There are assholes that are religious. There are also assholes that are non religious, and ev ...[snip]


ok... i take that back... someone give this man TF... seriously cause I am poor as shiat.
 
2012-12-02 09:33:44 AM  

HindiDiscoMonster: What exactly do atheistsChristians do but talk on a TV that you can turn off, and write books you don't have to buy, and chat in threads that you don't have to read?


I'm going to go with "Attempt to force their backward religious beliefs into laws, schools, and government so that everyone is subject to their moral traditions" for $1000, Alex.

HindiDiscoMonster: see how that works both ways?


Yeah, it works well, as long as you're more concerned with advancing your own litany than with being truthful...

HindiDiscoMonster: though most seem to simply disregard the inconvenient parts.


... and that about wraps that up.  Thanks for playing.
 
2012-12-02 09:34:22 AM  
i141.photobucket.com
 
2012-12-02 09:34:55 AM  

violentsalvation: jbc: jaylectricity: MaudlinMutantMollusk: that one's the wurst

Ugh.

When it comes to bad puns in Fark threads, the myrrh the merrier.

That makes no frankincense.


images.sodahead.com
 
2012-12-02 09:35:17 AM  
What an anti-nativity scene might look like:

i.imgur.com

c'mon atheists... you aren't even trying with that boring-assed sign crappage.

On a serious note, it is time for municipalities to put away the nativity scenes for good. Let the churches and shopping malls handle that sort of thing.

Please continue to decorate the streets with wreaths, and even feature a "Christmas" tree (call it a holiday tree... whatever) though. It's a winter break for everybody, regardless of religion.
 
2012-12-02 09:35:55 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: Chances are you did that stuff in church or at your house. Nobody says you shouldn't.

But the 1st Amendment is simple: if Christians get to put up their stuff on PUBLIC PROPERTY, then so does everyone else.

It's very simple. All or nothing.



ok, so don't be a dick for one month out of the year is to much for you? he was talking about those scenes evoking childhood memories of good times from youth, not religious indoctrination... is it really that hard to understand that people would like to have good memories once out of the year without some dick coming along and pissing all over it making that month just like every other month in the year? don't we see enough shiat in the news every farking day... can't people get 1 month... hell even just a week or a day to celebrate coming together in holiday cheer without some prick deciding that it's just too much?
 
2012-12-02 09:38:24 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: Eddie Ate Dynamite: Lionel Mandrake: Chances are you did that stuff in church or at your house. Nobody says you shouldn't.

But the 1st Amendment is simple: if Christians get to put up their stuff on PUBLIC PROPERTY, then so does everyone else.

It's very simple. All or nothing.

Yeah I get that. But I also think it's a simplistic and...um...cold? way of looking at it. Putting up an "atheist display" that says "There is no God or heaven" is incredibly dark to somebody that needs to believe that, or using your display to shiat on the nativity scene next door. I guess what I'd be happy with is saying you can put up whatever you want as long as it's not negative or some such thing. Do you see what I'm driving at? I don't want special rights for the Christians or anybody else, but I don't want to see a bunch of people being assholes to each other under the guise of fairness or justice or equal rights either.

I see. And who decides what makes something "negative" or "dark?"

A crucifix is pretty dark


maybe to an idiot.... to the athiest world it should be two sticks... to the Christian world it symbolizes Christ's sacrifice and redemption for all mankind... so no... not dark... it's a symbol of hope or firewood depending on which side of the fence you are on...

/don't be obtuse
 
2012-12-02 09:40:35 AM  

HindiDiscoMonster: Eddie Ate Dynamite: Lionel Mandrake: The Supreme Court has ruled that when the government opens up public property to private citizens - when it creates a public forum for speech - it cannot discriminate in favor of some viewpoints and against others.  

So, STFU about your oppression and the WAR ON CHRISTMAS™ and pack up your nativity scenes and take them somewhere private. I bet your church would let you set up a creche on their property. Why, I bet any number of individuals and businesses would gladly let you set up your displays on their property.

STOP SETTING THIS SHIAT UP ON PUBLIC PROPERTY

While this is all technically correct, I still find it a bit sad. I consider myself agnostic, but I still grew up in a church doing Christmas plays and what not. Nativity scenes are part and parcel of Christmas, just like a Christmas tree, egg nog, turkey and ham dinners, and Christmas music talking about Jesus. Perhaps some or all of these things don't apply to your Christmas, or maybe you don't celebrate or even recognize Christmas in any way, but that doesn't mean you have to be a dick about it.

Nativity scenes inspire warm feelings of remembrance and tradition in many people, and public grounds are a great place to put them because so many people can enjoy them in a common locale. Now the laws are correct, it wouldn't be right to allow a pro-Christ display without allowing an anti-Christ display as well. However I think there should also be some sort of a "don't be a farking asshole" law that judges the intent of such a display or something. A nativity scene is most likely meant to inspire and spread happiness and remembrance, whereas an anti-Christ display would most likely be intended to upset people, or at least not have warm-fuzzies as the reasoning behind it, arguments about indoctrination or whatever regarding a nativity scene aside.

Okay so religion has done a whole lot of bad things. There are assholes that are religious. There are also assholes that are n ...


Separation from Church and state, I do not think you undersand.
 
2012-12-02 09:41:45 AM  

gadian: I think you think too seriously about these things. Just let it go in these cases and you'll be much happier. It is what it is and this fight is better reserved for textbooks and national policy.


It's about drawing the battle lines.

You've got one side that wants a secular state. And another side who wants an entirely Christian state (see Dominionism).

If you've conceded that nativity scenes on the lawn and Ten Commandments on the courtroom wall, the next battle for them will be textbooks or medical policy.

Instead, if you engage at the near-trivial, you draw the battle there.

Does the general care about one acre of sloppy mud in Belgium? Not particularly. Except that conceding a thousand of those starts getting toward Paris.
 
2012-12-02 09:44:08 AM  
If you are wound up so tight that nativity scenes get your panties in a wad, then I have some bad news for you, your life is going to be miserable.
 
2012-12-02 09:45:58 AM  

Z-clipped: HindiDiscoMonster: What exactly do atheistsChristians do but talk on a TV that you can turn off, and write books you don't have to buy, and chat in threads that you don't have to read?

I'm going to go with "Attempt to force their backward religious beliefs into laws, schools, and government so that everyone is subject to their moral traditions" for $1000, Alex.


I'm sorry, thats the wrong answer... the correct answer was "nothing"
/note how i didn't bold the other part of the post

HindiDiscoMonster: see how that works both ways?

Yeah, it works well, as long as you're more concerned with advancing your own litany than with being truthful...


and how is that untruthful?

HindiDiscoMonster: though most seem to simply disregard the inconvenient parts.

... and that about wraps that up.  Thanks for playing.


ok? your welcome? ashinctersayswhat?
 
2012-12-02 09:48:50 AM  

get real: Separation from Church and state, I do not think you undersand.


don't be a dick... i don't think you get it.

24.media.tumblr.com
 
2012-12-02 09:50:20 AM  
Freely airing one's thoughts in a public forum through a decorative holiday display is only acceptable if you're a Xtian.

If you want to limit the ability of other people who disagree with you to air their opinions in proximity to you, stay on your goddamn property. Otherwise, if you're going to stand on your soapbox in the town square shouting you don't get to whine like a little biatch because other zealots show up and dilute your message.
 
2012-12-02 09:51:13 AM  

scuffleball: Well done, atheists. You're creating stupid stuff to combat what you claim is stupid stuff.


Sometimes, you have to fight fire with fire.

HindiDiscoMonster: When did the Christians tie you up and strap you down and force feed their dogma to you? Did it look like this:


More like this:

phillips.blogs.com

www.slate.com

www.wired.com

www.zombietime.com

1.bp.blogspot.com

towleroad.typepad.com

images.huffingtonpost.com

mydailyclarity.com

www.kerr-of-ardgowan.com
 
2012-12-02 09:51:21 AM  

smadge1: Atheists can put up their atheistic displays on their national atheist holiday seasons.

Fairs fair


We do. We're celebrating the winter solstice. A tradition dating back long before the the story of Jesus was cobbled together from even older stories. It's a date backed by observation, reason and/or science.

These days, it's just a good time to have a party. End of the year... beginning of winter... not a bad time for presents, either, a nice boost to retailers to finish out the year. Chop down and drag an evergreen into the house and hang crap on it, just like jesus would've done. It's pretty.

Besides... the christians started it by co-opting winter solstice to celebrate the birthday of a character in a book that, apparently, wouldn't have even been born in december, according to clues given in their own book.

So, who's celebrating whose holiday?

Sorry dude. Axial tilt is the reason for the season. Nothing else.
 
2012-12-02 09:52:28 AM  

trappedspirit: If you are wound up so tight that nativity scenes get your panties in a wad, then I have some bad news for you, your life is going to be miserable.


thats what it seems to be doesn't it? something that not only doesn't hurt atheists, but also gives them a day off throws them into a tizzy because [nothing] forbid that someone might have a warm and fuzzy memory once in this farked up year of newsworthy bullshiat like killings and whatnot.... i wonder how insecure someone must be to feel that way?
 
2012-12-02 09:53:24 AM  
Just like the rational Christians who show up in threads to state that not all Christians are dicks, I'm an atheist and couldn't care less about a nativity scene being displayed; public property or not.

You know why, because I'm a fscking atheist, which means I'm completely indifferent to it...it's just some figures like Santa or Frosty. If Christians (or any group) were putting up things that were hateful, I'd be against it. I understand that, legally, these trolls have every right to contest it and put up their own display if Christians are allowed theirs; but if you're going to make a point, how about putting up something which has an equal effect that a nativity scene sets out to achieve? Something that reflects kindness to others, good cheer, that isn't there simply to attack an opposing viewpoint, something other than "Hey, look at me, I'm an AW! Baby Jesus killed my father and raped my mother!".
 
2012-12-02 09:54:16 AM  

Eddie Ate Dynamite: Lionel Mandrake: Chances are you did that stuff in church or at your house. Nobody says you shouldn't.

But the 1st Amendment is simple: if Christians get to put up their stuff on PUBLIC PROPERTY, then so does everyone else.

It's very simple. All or nothing.

Yeah I get that. But I also think it's a simplistic and...um...cold? way of looking at it. Putting up an "atheist display" that says "There is no God or heaven" is incredibly dark to somebody that needs to believe that, or using your display to shiat on the nativity scene next door. I guess what I'd be happy with is saying you can put up whatever you want as long as it's not negative or some such thing. Do you see what I'm driving at? I don't want special rights for the Christians or anybody else, but I don't want to see a bunch of people being assholes to each other under the guise of fairness or justice or equal rights either.


But telling kids they are going to burn in fire is just peachy, right.
 
2012-12-02 09:54:37 AM  

Z-clipped: scuffleball: Well done, atheists. You're creating stupid stuff to combat what you claim is stupid stuff.

Sometimes, you have to fight fire with fire.

HindiDiscoMonster: When did the Christians tie you up and strap you down and force feed their dogma to you? Did it look like this:

More like this:

[phillips.blogs.com image 314x310]

[www.slate.com image 568x346]

[www.wired.com image 250x166]

[www.zombietime.com image 464x612]

[1.bp.blogspot.com image 476x304]

[towleroad.typepad.com image 450x326]

[images.huffingtonpost.com image 360x480]

[mydailyclarity.com image 330x220]

[www.kerr-of-ardgowan.com image 523x336]


omg... you mean..... you might have to NOT look/listen????

/the horror!!!
 
2012-12-02 09:56:03 AM  

roblarky: Just like the rational Christians who show up in threads to state that not all Christians are dicks, I'm an atheist and couldn't care less about a nativity scene being displayed; public property or not.

You know why, because I'm a fscking atheist, which means I'm completely indifferent to it...it's just some figures like Santa or Frosty. If Christians (or any group) were putting up things that were hateful, I'd be against it. I understand that, legally, these trolls have every right to contest it and put up their own display if Christians are allowed theirs; but if you're going to make a point, how about putting up something which has an equal effect that a nativity scene sets out to achieve? Something that reflects kindness to others, good cheer, that isn't there simply to attack an opposing viewpoint, something other than "Hey, look at me, I'm an AW! Baby Jesus killed my father and raped my mother!".


thank you... a voice of reason in a sea of derp.
 
2012-12-02 09:56:44 AM  
A city policy saying Christian displays were allowed on public property but anti-Christian ones were not would violate the First Amendment ... A coalition of churches challenged the new policy as a violation of their religious rights.

Yup, sounds about right for a Christian...
 
2012-12-02 09:57:32 AM  

LouDobbsAwaaaay: A city policy saying Christian displays were allowed on public property but anti-Christian ones were not would violate the First Amendment ... A coalition of churches challenged the new policy as a violation of their religious rights.

Yup, sounds about right for a Christian...



too late into the thread... you should have read a bit of it first

0/potato
 
2012-12-02 09:59:02 AM  

HindiDiscoMonster: too late into the thread... you should have read a bit of it first

0/potato


I appreciate you scoring your own post, but I was quoting the article directly.
 
2012-12-02 10:00:45 AM  

LouDobbsAwaaaay: HindiDiscoMonster: too late into the thread... you should have read a bit of it first

0/potato

I appreciate you scoring your own post, but I was quoting the article directly.


now thats cute... tubacksies... haven't seen that since 4th grade.

you of course know i was referring to your comment "Yup, sounds about right for a Christian..."

so again....

0/potatoe and no turnbacksies.
 
2012-12-02 10:01:33 AM  

letrole: Atheism is a Religion.


An

Only if bald is a hair color.
 
2012-12-02 10:01:37 AM  
Didn't read through the comments here, but the Santa Monica nativity scenes will in fact be going up next weekend. They will be on private property, along a major street in Santa Monica.
 
2012-12-02 10:02:26 AM  

ignatius_crumbcake: letrole: Atheism is a Religion.

An

Only if bald is a hair color.


The fark did that 'An' come from? Disregard that...
 
2012-12-02 10:05:36 AM  

HindiDiscoMonster: you of course know i was referring to your comment "Yup, sounds about right for a Christian..."


... and? A coalition of churches challenged the First Amendment as a violation of their religious rights. They do this shiat all the time. So, like I said: Yup, sounds about right for a Christian...
 
2012-12-02 10:06:06 AM  

HindiDiscoMonster: maybe to an idiot.... to the athiest world it should be two sticks...


Yeah, lol, two sticks with a dying, tortured man nailed to it. Nothing dark about that lol
 
2012-12-02 10:07:39 AM  

HindiDiscoMonster: omg... you mean..... you might have to NOT look/listen????


So, are you ignoring the fact that all of these involve religious oppression of other groups because it destroys your position, or are you not bright enough to recognize the common theme in those photographs?

HindiDiscoMonster: and how is that untruthful?


I'm leaning toward "not too bright", personally.

HindiDiscoMonster: too late into the thread... you should have read a bit of it first

0/potato


Wait... is this "performance art" or something?
 
2012-12-02 10:08:35 AM  

HindiDiscoMonster: ok, so don't be a dick for one month out of the year is to much for you? he was talking about those scenes evoking childhood memories of good times from youth, not religious indoctrination... is it really that hard to understand that people would like to have good memories once out of the year without some dick coming along and pissing all over it making that month just like every other month in the year?



The churches already do that when they put up signs telling people that they're going to be tortured for eternity if they don't believe in the magical sky baby.

Are you saying that only Christians should be allowed to continue using borderline hate speech in their displays? Or are you saying that your greatest childhood memories are of seeing nativity displays with "believer" and "unbeliever" signs on each side, with the latter quoting Zechariah 14:12?
 
2012-12-02 10:09:13 AM  
HindiDiscoMonster Account created: 2012-11-16 08:17:22

Feh. I should really do an alt-check on any name I don't recognize before responding.

/plonk
 
2012-12-02 10:09:48 AM  

squeez cheez: They will be on private property, along a major street in Santa Monica.


Terrific. Now everybody's happy. See?...that wasn't so hard.
 
2012-12-02 10:09:53 AM  

LouDobbsAwaaaay: HindiDiscoMonster: you of course know i was referring to your comment "Yup, sounds about right for a Christian..."

... and? A coalition of churches challenged the First Amendment as a violation of their religious rights. They do this shiat all the time. So, like I said: Yup, sounds about right for a Christian...


ok... i'll bite.... i'll explain this slowly: the point was you are generalizing... you know, something thats generally frowned upon because its dumb. the reasons for you generalizing are irrelevant (you are dumb, you hate all Christians because they all look alike, or whatever the reason is), but the fact that you are generalizing and you have been here for a loooong time and have called others on generalizing means that you must have been trolling.
 
2012-12-02 10:10:31 AM  

HindiDiscoMonster: trappedspirit: If you are wound up so tight that nativity scenes get your panties in a wad, then I have some bad news for you, your life is going to be miserable.

thats what it seems to be doesn't it? something that not only doesn't hurt atheists, but also gives them a day off throws them into a tizzy because [nothing] forbid that someone might have a warm and fuzzy memory once in this farked up year of newsworthy bullshiat like killings and whatnot.... i wonder how insecure someone must be to feel that way?


Login: HindiDiscoMonster (Want to sponsor this Farker for TotalFark?) (What's TotalFark?)
Fark account number: 824514
Account created: 2012-11-16 08:17:22
 
2012-12-02 10:11:18 AM  
It was British-born Flavius Constantinus (Constantine, originally Custennyn or
Custennin) (272-337) who authorised the compilation of the writings now called the New
Testament. After the death of his father in 306, Constantine became King of Britain, Gaul
and Spain, and then, after a series of victorious battles, Emperor of the Roman Empire.
Christian historians give little or no hint of the turmoil of the times and suspend
Constantine in the air, free of all human events happening around him. In truth, one of
Constantine's main problems was the uncontrollable disorder amongst presbyters and their
belief in numerous gods.
 
2012-12-02 10:12:31 AM  

Gordon Bennett: Valiente: Now, get "In God We Trust" off your fecking money, and you'll be able to take a few more steps away from ignorance.

[www.hotlikesauce.com image 618x530]


Yea but Darwin was British and everyone knows God is an American. duh.
 
2012-12-02 10:14:36 AM  
LesserEvil: It's a winter break for everybody, regardless of religion.

Or a summer break. Not regardless of hemisphere
 
2012-12-02 10:15:31 AM  

Revek: I think these assholes are the reason i finally deicded on Apatheism. They remind me of christian wingnuts. They only feel free if they are trying to tell other hows to be free.


THIS! I may not believe in god, but I enjoy the christmas season and its trappings (except the commercialization and horrible music).

I see no reason to protest nativity scenes, they don't hurt anybody and are not obscene.
 
2012-12-02 10:16:24 AM  
i.imgur.com

There, now we can all STFU and enjoy some cider.
 
2012-12-02 10:16:59 AM  
Krampus and Black Pete need to come back into popular culture. Parents these days don't even use coal as a threat anymore, much less "sausagification" or ritual beatings.
 
2012-12-02 10:17:36 AM  

Z-clipped: HindiDiscoMonster: omg... you mean..... you might have to NOT look/listen????

So, are you ignoring the fact that all of these involve religious oppression of other groups because it destroys your position, or are you not bright enough to recognize the common theme in those photographs?


op·pres·sion/əˈpreSHən/
Noun:

1 Prolonged cruel or unjust treatment or control.
2 The state of being subject to such treatment or control.

Besides the obvious trollbait kkk photo, in which of the others is anyone being oppressed? I see a bunch of people exercising their 1st amendment rights... what I do not see is any government sponsored oppression or limiting of freedoms or rights. Also note that standing on a soapbox spouting off to the clouds, air, or any citizens who happen to pass by is not "treatment" nor is it "control"


HindiDiscoMonster: and how is that untruthful?

I'm leaning toward "not too bright", personally.


you can lean toward whatever you like, but here... you may need this:
www.ikea.com

HindiDiscoMonster: too late into the thread... you should have read a bit of it first

0/potato

Wait... is this "performance art" or something?


never did like performance art... to fufu for my taste.
 
2012-12-02 10:19:06 AM  

StoPPeRmobile: HindiDiscoMonster: trappedspirit: If you are wound up so tight that nativity scenes get your panties in a wad, then I have some bad news for you, your life is going to be miserable.

thats what it seems to be doesn't it? something that not only doesn't hurt atheists, but also gives them a day off throws them into a tizzy because [nothing] forbid that someone might have a warm and fuzzy memory once in this farked up year of newsworthy bullshiat like killings and whatnot.... i wonder how insecure someone must be to feel that way?

Login: HindiDiscoMonster (Want to sponsor this Farker for TotalFark?) (What's TotalFark?)
Fark account number: 824514
Account created: 2012-11-16 08:17:22


hey look... i can do that to!

Login: StoPPeRmobile (Want to sponsor this Farker for TotalFark?) (What's TotalFark?)
Fark account number: 180330
Account created: 2004-09-01 10:45:24

neat.

what was your point again?
 
2012-12-02 10:19:32 AM  

Gyrfalcon: HotWingAgenda:

Not that I disagree with the sentiment; but you do realize, don't you, that we have ALWAYS gotten due process at courthouses--including the highest in the land--"covered in Christian labeling." Courthouses that oftener than not dispensed fairly even-handed justice regarding establishment of religion IN FAVOR of no religion at all, while sitting in a big building with "IN GOD WE TRUST" carved on the lintels.

The point being that it's really irrelevant whether the Christian god is invoked at a courthouse, or the Muslim god, or indeed the Norse gods or the Flying Spaghetti Monster--as long as DUE PROCESS is followed inside, which is theoretically religion-free, or should be. A Jewish judge should be able to sit on the bench with In God We Trust on the wall and still be relied upon to dispense justice to the Hindu and Buddhist complainants--and if he can't, then it hardly matters if the courtroom is scrubbed clean of every religious symbol known to man. I don't much care what the outside looks like, I just want to be sure the people inside are adhering to the law--they can practice in a cathedral for all I care, as long as the ru ...


Incorrect. Scopes Trial. Many, many, many times religion has gotten in the way of actual justice because the judge, jury, and lawmakers were too invested in their religion. You may be right in 90% (or more!) of cases, but "always" doesn't mean most of the time. We shouldn't settle for "most of the time."
 
2012-12-02 10:20:57 AM  

trappedspirit: HindiDiscoMonster: maybe to an idiot.... to the athiest world it should be two sticks...

Yeah, lol, two sticks with a dying, tortured man nailed to it. Nothing dark about that lol


he can't die... he is wood or metal depending on how much you spend... of course I was talking about a cross, not a Catholic crucifix... they do love the whole torture thing.
 
2012-12-02 10:21:13 AM  

dopekitty74: I see no reason to protest nativity scenes, they don't hurt anybody and are not obscene.


Either you hold the line, or you keep your mouth shut when the religious sneak in and ruin everything. We have members on the House Science Committee who regard climate change as a lie from the pits of Hell because the majority of Americans "see no reason to protest" because "they don't hurt anybody and are not obscene". Nativity scenes in the public square become the Ten Commandments on the courthouse steps becomes faith-based legislation becomes Christian Sharia.

Never turn your back on these people, for even a second.
 
2012-12-02 10:24:03 AM  

the ha ha guy: HindiDiscoMonster: ok, so don't be a dick for one month out of the year is to much for you? he was talking about those scenes evoking childhood memories of good times from youth, not religious indoctrination... is it really that hard to understand that people would like to have good memories once out of the year without some dick coming along and pissing all over it making that month just like every other month in the year?


The churches already do that when they put up signs telling people that they're going to be tortured for eternity if they don't believe in the magical sky baby.

Are you saying that only Christians should be allowed to continue using borderline hate speech in their displays? Or are you saying that your greatest childhood memories are of seeing nativity displays with "believer" and "unbeliever" signs on each side, with the latter quoting Zechariah 14:12?


obviously you never had a family in childhood... you must have never had pie, or Christmas dinner, or presents or happy children in your life... I would hate to see what terrible memories you must have of childhood if it brings you to hate anyone who might have a good memory to express.

/I pitty and am sorry for you.
 
2012-12-02 10:25:21 AM  

LouDobbsAwaaaay: HindiDiscoMonster Account created: 2012-11-16 08:17:22

Feh. I should really do an alt-check on any name I don't recognize before responding.

/plonk


that's ok... I don't like you either... I have you farkied in Red1 as "grinch and Christian hater"

/tit for tat.... this for that
//merry Christmas
 
2012-12-02 10:27:49 AM  

HindiDiscoMonster: what I do not see is any government sponsored oppression or limiting of freedoms or rights


You can't make your troll alts this obtuse, or people will get bored with you. It's no fun beating on your ignorant ass if I have to teach you American History in order to do it. Better luck next time.
 
2012-12-02 10:29:46 AM  

Z-clipped: HindiDiscoMonster: what I do not see is any government sponsored oppression or limiting of freedoms or rights

You can't make your troll alts this obtuse, or people will get bored with you. It's no fun beating on your ignorant ass if I have to teach you American History in order to do it. Better luck next time.


calling me a troll does not make you right... just saying.
 
2012-12-02 10:30:52 AM  
Good. Judge ruled correctly. I work in the Pacific Palisades/Malibu area. There are plenty of churches in the area to place these Nativity scenes on.
 
2012-12-02 10:33:44 AM  

raerae1980: Good. Judge ruled correctly. I work in the Pacific Palisades/Malibu area. There are plenty of churches in the area to place these Nativity scenes on.


agreed... if nobody can play nice, nobody gets to play. simple and to the point.
 
2012-12-02 10:35:03 AM  

HindiDiscoMonster: calling me a troll does not make you right... just saying.


Well, it's either that, or you're too stupid and/or dishonest to have an actual discussion with. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. Either way, you're not worth the time.
 
2012-12-02 10:35:42 AM  

HindiDiscoMonster: obviously you never had a family in childhood... you must have never had pie, or Christmas dinner, or presents or happy children in your life... I would hate to see what terrible memories you must have of childhood if it brings you to hate anyone who might have a good memory to express.



You get childhood memories of Christmas dinner from reading signs saying "Their flesh will rot while they are still standing on their feet, their eyes will rot in their sockets, and their tongues will rot in their mouths"?

And you say I'm the one with terrible childhood memories...
 
2012-12-02 10:39:47 AM  

Bob Down: LesserEvil: It's a winter break for everybody, regardless of religion.

Or a summer break. Not regardless of hemisphere


True, if I was not talking specifically about the US, of course.

...although to be nitpicky, the US has plenty of things going on south of the equator, too.

At least we have a more secular celebration to plan a July break (is that better than 'summer'?) around.
 
2012-12-02 10:40:04 AM  

HindiDiscoMonster: obviously you never had a family in childhood... you must have never had pie, or Christmas dinner, or presents or happy children in your life... I would hate to see what terrible memories you must have of childhood if it brings you to hate anyone who might have a good memory to express.

/I pitty and am sorry for you


Not everyone wants a "The White People TM" Christmas dickhead. You assholes are the reason we have Christmas carols going nonstop since Thanksgiving.
 
2012-12-02 10:41:08 AM  

LouDobbsAwaaaay: Never turn your back on these people, for even a second.


I really do see where you're coming from, and it's honestly difficult to have to argue against it as I used to feel exactly the same.

However, I've decided to base my feelings on matters contextually. Meaning, in this context, it's not "obscene" nor hurting anybody, therefore I'm indifferent. When any group crosses that line, changing the context (like having the Ten Commandments on the courthouse steps), I would become vocal against it because it's a blatant effort to associate their beliefs with the legal system. A Nativity scene isn't infringing anyone's rights nor attempting to shove anything down their throats.

That's like stating that the thousands (no idea here, just pulling out a likely figure) of homeless people who are fed and sheltered by religious groups should be left hungry and sleeping on benches in said public parks because to allow Christians to feed and/or shelter them is somehow manipulating a person in desperation and somehow leads to Christians infringing on my rights or forcing their beliefs down my throat.

At the end of the day, most religions, when properly interpreted and practiced, have similar goals: be nice and do for others as you would hope they would do for you.

Sure, there are DROVES of religious people who interpret and selectively follow some parts while ignoring other areas; just as there are plenty of Atheists who set out to attack religion.

So for me, I choose my battles based on context. As I said earlier, Atheists should certainly exercise their right to setup a display, but I feel it should be used to show that we are just as caring and kind-spirited as our (rational, non-asshole) Christians are. That we're not a bunch of extremists set out to make people unhappy.

Just my thoughts, not my place to tell anyone what they should think.
 
2012-12-02 10:41:43 AM  

Eddie Ate Dynamite: I guess what I'd be happy with is saying you can put up whatever you want as long as it's not negative or some such thing.


I like this idea. How about true? I don`t want lies put up and they are pretty negative so how about anything not negative that can be proven to be true?

Then nobody says nasty things OR lies, that MUST be a good thing, yes?
 
2012-12-02 10:43:54 AM  

ignatius_crumbcake: letrole: Atheism is a Religion.

An

Only if bald is a hair color.


Only if black is a color
 
2012-12-02 10:44:26 AM  
I'm partial to the "It's a Girl" one from Wisconsin, I believe it was in the last couple of years.

ffrf.org
 
2012-12-02 10:46:59 AM  

roblarky: Meaning, in this context, it's not "obscene" nor hurting anybody, therefore I'm indifferent. When any group crosses that line, changing the context (like having the Ten Commandments on the courthouse steps), I would become vocal against it because it's a blatant effort to associate their beliefs with the legal system. A Nativity scene isn't infringing anyone's rights nor attempting to shove anything down their throats.


This is precisely the attitude they feed on. Don't say I didn't warn you...
 
2012-12-02 10:47:32 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: Revek: That you come in talking about how atheist don't do this or don't' do that but the truth is that they just do different asshole things.

For example?

Revek: I just simply don't care how wrong you are about the tendency of atheist to be just as uncompromising in their quest to be... Well assholes

When are atheists uncompromising?

When they demand that the Constitution be applied equally to all groups? When they fight to keep "Intelligent Design" out of science textbooks? When, like one guy sues over "In God We Trust" on the money? OK, that guy's an ass, but I happen to agree it doesn't belong there. Nevertheless, that is like ONE guy. Unless he's your neighbor or a relative, you can easily ignore the whole thing.

What exactly do atheists do but talk on a TV that you can turn off, and write books you don't have to buy, and chat in threads that you don't have to read?


Their douchiness is incredibly annoying. Isn't that enough reason to complain about them?
 
2012-12-02 10:49:54 AM  

Revek: Lionel Mandrake: Revek: That you come in talking about how atheist don't do this or don't' do that but the truth is that they just do different asshole things.

For example?

Revek: I just simply don't care how wrong you are about the tendency of atheist to be just as uncompromising in their quest to be... Well assholes

When are atheists uncompromising?

When they demand that the Constitution be applied equally to all groups? When they fight to keep "Intelligent Design" out of science textbooks? When, like one guy sues over "In God We Trust" on the money? OK, that guy's an ass, but I happen to agree it doesn't belong there. Nevertheless, that is like ONE guy. Unless he's your neighbor or a relative, you can easily ignore the whole thing.

What exactly do atheists do but talk on a TV that you can turn off, and write books you don't have to buy, and chat in threads that you don't have to read?

That you seek to tell us all how this unknown thing is this way rather than that way. In this respect you are identical to the theist. And how is it that the guy who wants in god we trust off the money is any different from the guy who want the nativity scene off the public land. To me, Both assholes. These things don't force you to go to church. They don't force you to believe. If it offends the eye then do not look upon it, My eyes see it all with equal doubt and I am not offended.

 

And therefore, everyone else is an asshole.
/Better not disagree with me, you jerk
 
2012-12-02 10:53:18 AM  

Revek: log_jammin: Revek: How exactly do you smack around a troll? If they are truly trolling how do you piss on their parade, prove them wrong or otherwise do anything to smack them other than not respond.

It's easy actually. you just use their words against them, until they get caught in a trap of their own doing. At that point they usually slink away.

A troll cares nothing for traps or for how you use their words. They just want a response. They slink away because your boringly predictable.


What? Boringly predictable what?
 
2012-12-02 10:54:17 AM  

bigheadface: Revek: Lionel Mandrake: Revek: That you come in talking about how atheist don't do this or don't' do that but the truth is that they just do different asshole things.

For example?

Revek: I just simply don't care how wrong you are about the tendency of atheist to be just as uncompromising in their quest to be... Well assholes

When are atheists uncompromising?

When they demand that the Constitution be applied equally to all groups? When they fight to keep "Intelligent Design" out of science textbooks? When, like one guy sues over "In God We Trust" on the money? OK, that guy's an ass, but I happen to agree it doesn't belong there. Nevertheless, that is like ONE guy. Unless he's your neighbor or a relative, you can easily ignore the whole thing.

What exactly do atheists do but talk on a TV that you can turn off, and write books you don't have to buy, and chat in threads that you don't have to read?

That you seek to tell us all how this unknown thing is this way rather than that way. In this respect you are identical to the theist. And how is it that the guy who wants in god we trust off the money is any different from the guy who want the nativity scene off the public land. To me, Both assholes. These things don't force you to go to church. They don't force you to believe. If it offends the eye then do not look upon it, My eyes see it all with equal doubt and I am not offended. 

And therefore, everyone else is an asshole.
/Better not disagree with me, you jerk


No and I disagree.
 
2012-12-02 10:56:57 AM  

roblarky: most religions, when properly interpreted


lol
 
2012-12-02 11:02:05 AM  
meh... the courts got it right - allow all points of view to be displayed equally on public property, or allow nothing. That way - no one is offended - and no particular point of view is "supported' over a different point of view.

Quite frankly ... people that are so narrow minded, who believe only their particular 'point of view' is the 'correct' one, are people I typically want to stay as far, far away from as I possibly can.
 
2012-12-02 11:04:08 AM  

jbc: jaylectricity: MaudlinMutantMollusk: that one's the wurst

Ugh.

When it comes to bad puns in Fark threads, the myrrh the merrier.


Frankly, I am incensed by this.
 
2012-12-02 11:07:38 AM  

Phil Moskowitz: Christians have to draw athiests into a shiat fight or they'll just continue to sink into irrelevance.


You've never paid much attention to Fark threads, I see.
Nothing brings out the Anti-Theists like a Fark religious themed thread...like this one for example.
Do pay better attention in future, mr. moskowitz
/you have no excuse,you've been here awhile now.
 
2012-12-02 11:13:22 AM  
Anything that upsets and frustrates the religious is a win for mankind.

Eradicate religious mental illness.
 
2012-12-02 11:13:49 AM  

craig328:
Arlington national cemetery is public land as well...guess what you'll see all over the place there. Public land does not necessarily in and of itself mean no religious symbols whatsoever...mostly because it can be argued that banning such promotes atheism and is prohibiting the free exercise of religion.


Arlington is an example that supports what happened in this story. Any group can be represented there which means the government is not endorsing one religion (which is constitutionally sound). The following symbols are available for gravestones there:

img38.imageshack.us
 
2012-12-02 11:15:05 AM  
Puppets, acting as I bid. These fools don't understand that not believing in God or myself takes more faith than believing.

And nobody knows or can accept that the very thing they report not to believe in is orchestrating their every move.

Fools.
 
2012-12-02 11:27:18 AM  
Or you know, they could be decent human beings and not care about nativity scenes and just go about their life. But most militant atheists are no better for the communities they live in than Bible Thumpers.
 
2012-12-02 11:28:54 AM  

roblarky: A Nativity scene isn't infringing anyone's rights nor attempting to shove anything down their throats.


Nor is a sign that says "Happy Holidays" or "Love is within you", but that didn't stop them from being vandalized for not promoting the christian mythology.

i.imgur.com

i.imgur.com
 
2012-12-02 11:30:51 AM  

DaCaptain19: Puppets are - by definition - brainless beings.

And I am your puppet-master. I use the media to sow fear, hatred and discord while you march - under my controlling hand - to buy your petty guns for a lie I conjured and events which will never happen.

I call my puppets hu-MANS and I create them as fools.


DaCaptain19: Puppets, acting as I bid. These fools don't understand that not believing in God or myself takes more faith than believing.

And nobody knows or can accept that the very thing they report not to believe in is orchestrating their every move.

Fools.


Wow, you are really puppeting up the threads today
 
2012-12-02 11:32:39 AM  
If the militant atheists make it so we don't get Christmas off, I will become a Christian out of spite.
 
2012-12-02 11:35:56 AM  
pjmedia.com
 
2012-12-02 11:36:50 AM  

machoprogrammer: If the militant atheists make it so we don't get Christmas off, I will become a Christian out of spite.


Just think, no days off for Christmas or Easter. Atheists are just corporate leaders in hippie garb.
 
2012-12-02 11:44:04 AM  
I love the image in TFA of the nativity scene all caged off from everything. It would be perfect if that were brick instead of wire fencing.
 
2012-12-02 11:48:59 AM  

machoprogrammer: I will become a Christian out of spite.


Ladies and gentlemen, your average Farker in a religion thread.
 
2012-12-02 11:50:13 AM  
Since this is the 334th comment, I doubt many people will see it. But all I have to say is:

The atheists (and vegans and especially atheist vegans) I have met are some of the most miserable people on earth - and that's coming from a latent Catholic.
 
2012-12-02 11:51:53 AM  

letrole: Atheism is a Religion.


10/10 you can't go wrong with the simple classics
 
2012-12-02 11:55:42 AM  

Begoggle: letrole: Atheism is a Religion.

10/10 you can't go wrong with the simple classics


Bald is a Hair Color.
 
2012-12-02 11:58:53 AM  
Remember that hate in your mind is giving the other side free rent in your mind.
 
2012-12-02 11:59:02 AM  

HindiDiscoMonster: what was your point again?


1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-12-02 12:05:42 PM  

machoprogrammer: If the militant atheists make it so we don't get Christmas off, I will become a Christian out of spite.


For every religion you don't believe I am going to start two!

/wait, wut
 
2012-12-02 12:35:09 PM  
This makes as much sense as putting up anti-leprechaun displays on St. Patrick's day.

What happened to you, Fat Iran? You used to be cool.
 
2012-12-02 12:54:12 PM  
letrole: Atheism is a Religion.

mittromneysdog: Bald is a Hair Color.

Bald is a Hair Style.
 
2012-12-02 01:23:27 PM  

trappedspirit: machoprogrammer: If the militant atheists make it so we don't get Christmas off, I will become a Christian out of spite.

For every religion you don't believe I am going to start two!

/wait, wut


You beat me to it.
I was going to go with "for every god you don't believe in, I'm gonna worship three!"

/shakes tiny fist
 
2012-12-02 01:27:56 PM  
Seams to be plenty of derp to go around.
 
2012-12-02 01:29:02 PM  
Establishment clause is not "OMFG a cross in public" freakout, but that's what it devolved into after "separation of church and state" became etched in small thinkers' minds.

Atheists
React
 
2012-12-02 01:30:41 PM  
I'd like to see hellenism make a come-back. Christmas could do with a bit of orgiastic bacchanalia.
 
2012-12-02 01:34:59 PM  

the ha ha guy: HindiDiscoMonster: obviously you never had a family in childhood... you must have never had pie, or Christmas dinner, or presents or happy children in your life... I would hate to see what terrible memories you must have of childhood if it brings you to hate anyone who might have a good memory to express.


You get childhood memories of Christmas dinner from reading signs saying "Their flesh will rot while they are still standing on their feet, their eyes will rot in their sockets, and their tongues will rot in their mouths"?

And you say I'm the one with terrible childhood memories...


never... not once in my lifetime have i ever seen someone put up a sign like that around Christmas time... not once.
 
2012-12-02 01:37:39 PM  

mittromneysdog: Begoggle: letrole: Atheism is a Religion.

10/10 you can't go wrong with the simple classics

Bald is a Hair Color.


woof... woofwoof, woof woof woof?
 
2012-12-02 01:41:10 PM  

Schroedinger's Glory Hole: HindiDiscoMonster: obviously you never had a family in childhood... you must have never had pie, or Christmas dinner, or presents or happy children in your life... I would hate to see what terrible memories you must have of childhood if it brings you to hate anyone who might have a good memory to express.

/I pitty and am sorry for you

Not everyone wants a "The White People TM" Christmas dickhead. You assholes are the reason we have Christmas carols going nonstop since Thanksgiving.


24.media.tumblr.com

/Nobody was saying you had to celebrate white people Christmas cupcake... way to miss the point though.
 
2012-12-02 01:47:28 PM  

This About That: Revek: these assholes ... remind me of christian wingnuts

Bingo.


Seconded.
 
2012-12-02 02:05:30 PM  

ShawnDoc: Lionel Mandrake: I see. And who decides what makes something "negative" or "dark?"

A crucifix is pretty dark

Being told you're going to spend an eternity burning in a lake of fire if you don't believe in a 2,000 year old book, seems pretty dark and negative to me.


"My young son asked me what happens after we die. I told him we get buried under a bunch of dirt and worms eat our bodies. I guess I should have told him the truth - that most of us go to Hell and burn eternally - but I didn't want to upset him." - Jack Handey
 
2012-12-02 02:05:58 PM  
The dense and obtuse really crawled out of the woodwork for this thread, too many trolls to respond to.

I wish your decedents the best of luck in XXX years when Christians are considered a minority. Between education, immigration, and the birth-rates of other groups being high, it will happen eventually.

If our small problem of localized Dominionism is overcome by something more akin to Sharia Law(a fight that's happening in the UK iirc), then we'll see who's clamoring and campaigning for separation of church and state.
 
2012-12-02 02:13:06 PM  
This kind of harassment needs to stop. I understand that some atheists feel like the open expression of Christianity implies they're second class citizens.

And I don't think the ten commandments belong on court monuments.
I don't think Nativity Scenes belong at the state capitals.
I know that no prayers should be endorsed or led by public school teachers or principles.

But there is a big difference between expressing love for a spaghetti monster that may or may not be real and directed hate speech and harassment meant to belittle and/or humiliate and/or mock.

But no, the christians have been so mean to athiests and they've killed so many people so they deserve it! Even if they're individually good people, they're guilty by homeowners association!
 
2012-12-02 02:17:23 PM  

mutterfark: REO-Weedwagon: Atheists are the same as Westboro Baptist Church.

We are? But what do I put on the signs? 'THE UNIVERSE DOESN'T CARE IF YOU'RE GAY OR GET MARRIED AND NEITHER DO I'? And what kind of funerals am I supposed to show up at?


i45.tinypic.com
 
2012-12-02 02:20:24 PM  
i50.tinypic.com
 
2012-12-02 02:31:21 PM  

bigdanc: This kind of harassment needs to stop.


What harassment? If you want to promote your views on state property then it has to be open to other views as well.

There are two choices: Promote your views on private property or accept that views contradicting yours may be posted side-by-side with yours on public property.

Why do christians go all sandy-vagina when things are fair??
 
2012-12-02 02:39:35 PM  

machoprogrammer: If the militant atheists make it so we don't get Christmas off, I will become a Christian out of spite.


You see anyone complaining about the day off?
 
2012-12-02 02:39:43 PM  
Well, at least everybody understands the true meaning of Christmas: making sure everybody knows exactly where you stand politically.

My atheist nativity scene is going to be Barack and Michelle Obama as Mary and Joseph and maybe a mockup of the Constitution as Baby Jesus. I don't know who the wise men will be - maybe Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert and Rachel Maddow.

Or, if it's less trouble, maybe research and see if there are any Zoroastrian holiday traditions I can exploit. Zoroastrianism doesn't get nearly as much attention as the more glamorous religions.
 
2012-12-02 02:45:25 PM  

Smelly Pirate Hooker: I don't know who the wise men will be - maybe Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert and Rachel Maddow.


I get it!! har har har
 
2012-12-02 02:47:28 PM  
I have to say, as an atheist, I'm not terribly offended by nativity scenes on public property, but I understand why others are.

It's a precedent thing. If you allow religious people to display their particular fairy tales on public property, they won't stop there. They'll use it to shoehorn religion into everything else (as they prove almost every day).

They don't want things to be fair. They want Christianity to be in charge of everything. And if they could, they'd make every other religion illegal, like other countries do to benefit Islam.

Just put the farking nativity in front of the church or your front yard and be done with it. How hard is that? Why does it have to go in front of city hall or the courthouse?

Answer: it doesn't, unless you're the kind of asshole who believes in rubbing it into other people's faces. That's the reason this shiat happens every year.
 
2012-12-02 02:48:51 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: Smelly Pirate Hooker: I don't know who the wise men will be - maybe Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert and Rachel Maddow.

I get it!! har har har


I'm nothing if not subtle. I thought about Pelosi, Biden and Reid as the wise men, but thought that might be a little too much.
 
2012-12-02 02:52:44 PM  

Smelly Pirate Hooker: I have to say, as an atheist, I'm not terribly offended by nativity scenes on public property, but I understand why others are.

It's a precedent thing. If you allow religious people to display their particular fairy tales on public property, they won't stop there. They'll use it to shoehorn religion into everything else (as they prove almost every day).

They don't want things to be fair. They want Christianity to be in charge of everything. And if they could, they'd make every other religion illegal, like other countries do to benefit Islam.

Just put the farking nativity in front of the church or your front yard and be done with it. How hard is that? Why does it have to go in front of city hall or the courthouse?

Answer: it doesn't, unless you're the kind of asshole who believes in rubbing it into other people's faces. That's the reason this shiat happens every year.


It's the typical complaint; Christians view having their special privileges revoked as persecution. Look at what happened to Damon Fowler.

Damon Fowler, an atheist student at Bastrop High School in Louisiana, was about to graduate. His public school was planning to have a prayer as part of the graduation ceremony: as they traditionally did, as so many public schools around the country do every year. But Fowler -- knowing that government-sponsored prayer in the public schools is unconstitutional and legally forbidden -- contacted the school superintendent to let him know that he opposed the prayer, and would be contacting the ACLU if it happened. The school -- at first, anyway -- agreed, and canceled the prayer.

Then Fowler's name, and his role in this incident, was leaked. As a direct result:

1) Fowler has been hounded, pilloried, and ostracized by his community.

2) One of Fowler's teachers has publicly demeaned him.

3) Fowler has been physically threatened. Students have threatened to "jump him" at graduation practice, and he has received multiple threats of bodily harm, and even death threats.

4) Fowler's parents have cut off his financial support, kicked him out of the house, and thrown his belongings onto the front porch.

Oh, and by the way? They went ahead and had the graduation prayer anyway .
 
2012-12-02 02:57:11 PM  

L.D. Ablo: I'd sure like to put up a display for Eris and hand out free hot dogs on Fridays.


What is stopping you? Or do you mean you would sure like to put up a display for Eris and hand out free hot dogs on Fridays on public property? If you want to do that on public property well you need to get the proper permits. Otherwise your are littering and possible vandalizing public property, not to mention disturbing the peace.
 
2012-12-02 03:01:23 PM  

StoPPeRmobile: But telling kids they are going to burn in fire is just peachy, right.


the ha ha guy: The churches already do that when they put up signs telling people that they're going to be tortured for eternity if they don't believe in the magical sky baby.

Are you saying that only Christians should be allowed to continue using borderline hate speech in their displays? Or are you saying that your greatest childhood memories are of seeing nativity displays with "believer" and "unbeliever" signs on each side, with the latter quoting Zechariah 14:12?



These generally aren't a part of traditional nativity displays.

In any given group you're going to have a percentage of assholes. If these people acting like assholes causes you to turn around and act like an asshole then we simply create a loop where, at the end, everybody's acting like an asshole because somebody else was an asshole to them. If we can't even use Christmas as a time to -not- be petulant children out to ruin somebody else's day then I think we might be farked as a society.

So now nobody can put up displays on the public property where nativity scenes had been featured for 60+ years because people ended up acting like spoiled brats and got their toys taken away altogether. So yeah, you got your equality under the law but now a Christmas tradition that brought happiness to a lot of folks over the years is no more. While it's the right thing legally, it's pretty farked up morally.

"But now it's the same for both sides and the Xians can just put their false beliefs up in the church yard! The atheists tried to have equal rights but people didn't like it when they put up displays denigrating a large segment of the population during a widely celebrated holiday, so now nobody gets to use the public land for anything, it's totally fair!" Don't be obtuse.
 
2012-12-02 03:03:47 PM  

WhippingBoy: This makes as much sense as putting up anti-leprechaun displays on St. Patrick's day.

What happened to you, Fat Iran? You used to be cool.


Hey buddy, I'm constantly complaining about the leprechaunists.

/aleprechaunist
 
2012-12-02 03:05:32 PM  

OtherLittleGuy: This About That: Revek: these assholes ... remind me of christian wingnuts

Bingo.

Seconded.


Third-ed

/or whatever
 
2012-12-02 03:22:09 PM  

feckingmorons: Just let the nativity scenes be set up on private property rather than public property.


That's really all the atheists are asking for.

But if public space and public funds are going to be used for religious displays, then we're entitled to the same.
 
2012-12-02 03:26:59 PM  
What would Christmas be without hate and intolerance?
 
2012-12-02 03:28:38 PM  
Repo Man: Oh, and by the way? They went ahead and had the graduation prayer anyway .


Sounds like the standards of the community prevailed.
 
2012-12-02 03:29:13 PM  
It's so interesting to watch people fighting and verbally blacking each other's eyes over symbols instead of actual, tangible realities.

NOT.

Please rub the crumbs n stickies outta your eyes, folks. You're being deliberately played.

If you want an alternative target, go after the mass media, which knowingly whips this stale, boring sh*tstorm up every gods damned year for nothing better than a greasy fistful of shiattily-scripted-blipvert dollars.

It's a deliberate, premeditated crime against the human intellect.
 
2012-12-02 03:30:33 PM  

Smelly Pirate Hooker: It's a precedent thing. If you allow religious people to display their particular fairy tales on public property, they won't stop there. They'll use it to shoehorn religion into everything else (as they prove almost every day).


While it can be a precedent, it's not always. Sometimes it's just the image conveyed, almost as if one is advertising "We're a christian only community." And then the assholes of the group act like that.

That's why the city tried to allow for everything. Nothing wrong with that, it's the asshole vandals that broke the fairness., not the Atheists. The Atheists vandalized nothing(barring the possibility mentioned up thread of people doing it to make the religious look bad.....[and at that, it's not as if atheists have to do anything for that to happen, historically some do well enough on their own, not much motivates people to do stupid shiat like true zealotry...their only rivals are drunk rednecks who say, "Here, hold my beer").

That's what's farked up about these threads and why I said they're crawling out of the woodwork. The socially unacceptable behavior, vandalism, was the breaking point, and signs point to it being some of the religious people.
Yet, here we have a thread full of people blaming atheists for wrongdoing, very conveniently not grasping that point.
 
2012-12-02 04:39:12 PM  

Repo Man: [i50.tinypic.com image 600x600]


Damn, I want a Nietzsche sweater...
 
2012-12-02 04:41:02 PM  

HindiDiscoMonster: get real: Separation from Church and state, I do not think you undersand.

don't be a dick... i don't think you get it.

[24.media.tumblr.com image 400x400]


The point is, that why should Christians get to set up stuff on PUBLIC property, but other religious groups are not.

I'm an atheist, and I have no personal issue with nativity scenes on public property, so long as other groups of people are allowed to use public property to promote their views also. The atheists got the right to do so and the Christians threw a hissy fit, thus leading the city to decide to ban any such displays, so they've only themselves to blame.
 
2012-12-02 04:45:12 PM  

Kittypie070: It's so interesting to watch people fighting and verbally blacking each other's eyes over symbols instead of actual, tangible realities.

NOT.

Please rub the crumbs n stickies outta your eyes, folks. You're being deliberately played.

If you want an alternative target, go after the mass media, which knowingly whips this stale, boring sh*tstorm up every gods damned year for nothing better than a greasy fistful of shiattily-scripted-blipvert dollars.

It's a deliberate, premeditated crime against the human intellect.


You forgot to yell "WAKE UP SHEEPLE".
 
2012-12-02 04:54:16 PM  

Repo Man: 4) Fowler's parents have cut off his financial support, kicked him out of the house, and thrown his belongings onto the front porch.


That may be the most righteous of all those Christian actions.

I don't get the total disconnect in people like this (and I am NOT talking about all Christians, and certainly none that I know). How do you pretend to worship a man/god that preached nothing but love and a hatred of hypocrisy, then cut off your kid completely for embarrassing you?
 
2012-12-02 05:20:24 PM  

Vegan Meat Popsicle: Kittypie070: It's so interesting to watch people fighting and verbally blacking each other's eyes over symbols instead of actual, tangible realities.

NOT.

Please rub the crumbs n stickies outta your eyes, folks. You're being deliberately played.

If you want an alternative target, go after the mass media, which knowingly whips this stale, boring sh*tstorm up every gods damned year for nothing better than a greasy fistful of shiattily-scripted-blipvert dollars.

It's a deliberate, premeditated crime against the human intellect.

You forgot to yell "WAKE UP SHEEPLE".



Are you too dense to figure out that I was deliberately avoiding that miserable, shiatty, demeaning phrase?
 
2012-12-02 05:21:34 PM  

L.D. Ablo: scalpod: L.D. Ablo: I'd sure like to put up a display for Eris and hand out free hot dogs on Fridays.

Maybe a monument to the Original Snub?

Golden apples for all!

Not that Discordianism is a real religion. It's just a joke. Right?


It's still real to me dammit!
 
2012-12-02 05:24:06 PM  

letrole: Atheism is a Religion.


God evolved.
 
2012-12-02 05:25:35 PM  

trappedspirit: If you are wound up so tight that nativity scenes get your panties in a wad, then I have some bad news for you, your life is going to be miserable.


But if not having them causes you to suffer a conniption fit, you'll be just fine.
 
2012-12-02 05:29:41 PM  

trappedspirit: DaCaptain19: Puppets are - by definition - brainless beings.

And I am your puppet-master. I use the media to sow fear, hatred and discord while you march - under my controlling hand - to buy your petty guns for a lie I conjured and events which will never happen.

I call my puppets hu-MANS and I create them as fools.

DaCaptain19: Puppets, acting as I bid. These fools don't understand that not believing in God or myself takes more faith than believing.

And nobody knows or can accept that the very thing they report not to believe in is orchestrating their every move.

Fools.

Wow, you are really puppeting up the threads today


He enjoys putting his arm up other peoples' backsides, that's all. Nothing weird or anything.
 
2012-12-02 05:30:47 PM  

dopekitty74: HindiDiscoMonster: get real: Separation from Church and state, I do not think you undersand.

don't be a dick... i don't think you get it.

[24.media.tumblr.com image 400x400]

The point is, that why should Christians get to set up stuff on PUBLIC property, but other religious groups are not.

I'm an atheist, and I have no personal issue with nativity scenes on public property, so long as other groups of people are allowed to use public property to promote their views also. The atheists got the right to do so and the Christians threw a hissy fit, thus leading the city to decide to ban any such displays, so they've only themselves to blame.


and i agree with the ruling... like i said before... if nobody can play nice, nobody gets to play. :)
i also believe however, that when any group puts up something intended to troll another group, that is hateful... when someone can explain how a nativity scene is also hateful, then i won't have a problem with a hateful counterpoint... till then, i still say "don't be a dick"... thats all i was saying. nobody pissed on anyone's cheerios by putting up a nativity scene, but putting up something that is equivalent to EABOD in response is hateful. i saw - somewhere back in the thread an athiest sponsored message of love and understanding... now that would be something in line with a counter point to a nativity scene... something still saying love and understanding, but without the religious dogma.
 
2012-12-02 05:33:17 PM  

StoPPeRmobile: WhippingBoy: This makes as much sense as putting up anti-leprechaun displays on St. Patrick's day.

What happened to you, Fat Iran? You used to be cool.

Hey buddy, I'm constantly complaining about the leprechaunists.

/aleprechaunist


i could get behind that... except maybe: stoutprechaunist... :P
 
2012-12-02 05:40:49 PM  

Revek: Atheist are trying to convince peaceful people who are not trying to knock on your door that they are right and theist are wrong without having any proof they are right.


Proof they're right. How do they have any burden of proof? You don't get to just make shiat up and ask other people to prove you wrong.
 
2012-12-02 05:53:53 PM  

scalpod: L.D. Ablo: scalpod: L.D. Ablo: I'd sure like to put up a display for Eris and hand out free hot dogs on Fridays.

Maybe a monument to the Original Snub?

Golden apples for all!

Not that Discordianism is a real religion. It's just a joke. Right?

It's still real to me dammit!


It has some cool music.
 
2012-12-02 06:19:15 PM  
Repo Man: 4) Fowler's parents have cut off his financial support, kicked him out of the house, and thrown his belongings onto the front porch.

Lionel Mandrake: I don't get the total disconnect in people like this (and I am NOT talking about all Christians, and certainly none that I know). How do you pretend to worship a man/god that preached nothing but love and a hatred of hypocrisy, then cut off your kid completely for embarrassing you?



Parents aren't obligated to provide room and board for children who have reached majority. Christians are not justified in trying to impose beliefs upon someone who has plainly rejected those beliefs.

Occam's Razor would lead to the obvious conclusion that Fowler simply alienated his parents one time too many and they had enough.

If you do a bit of research, read his own words, you'll find this fellow is a bit of a twat- waffle whose main ambitions seem to be suing the parish school system or learning to be a video game programmer. Sounds like a real winner.
 
2012-12-02 07:09:03 PM  
I guess I'm just now realizing how vindictive and petty atheists have become. Sounds like they are the angry, vindictive, preachy arseholes forcing their values on everyone else. you know,what they claim everyone else is.
 
2012-12-02 07:14:37 PM  

Proteios1: I guess I'm just now realizing how vindictive and petty atheists have become. Sounds like they are the angry, vindictive, preachy arseholes forcing their values on everyone else. you know,what they claim everyone else is.


Just now, if you don't count all of the other times you've posted essentially the same shiat.
 
2012-12-02 07:15:05 PM  

Proteios1: I guess I'm just now realizing how vindictive and petty atheists have become. Sounds like they are the angry, vindictive, preachy arseholes forcing their values on everyone else. you know,what they claim everyone else is.


Yes ... asking for equal rights and to have the constitution followed by government bodies is being an "angry, vindictive, preachy arsehole".

But christians using government facilities to shove their ridiculous beliefs down everyone's throats is being "kind, warm and loving people". Right??
 
2012-12-02 07:25:18 PM  

Proteios1: I guess I'm just now realizing how vindictive and petty atheists have become. Sounds like they are the angry, vindictive, preachy arseholes forcing their values on everyone else. you know,what they claim everyone else is.


Oh yes, so petty and vindictive, what with following the law, asking that the law be equally applied to all, and all that. Not like those kind, law-abiding Christians who vandalized the atheist displays, causing the city to pass the blanket ban, thus making it so no one could use public property for their displays. Those people are above reproach.
 
2012-12-02 07:42:25 PM  

mamoru: Proteios1: I guess I'm just now realizing how vindictive and petty atheists have become. Sounds like they are the angry, vindictive, preachy arseholes forcing their values on everyone else. you know,what they claim everyone else is.

Oh yes, so petty and vindictive, what with following the law, asking that the law be equally applied to all, and all that. Not like those kind, law-abiding Christians who vandalized the atheist displays, causing the city to pass the blanket ban, thus making it so no one could use public property for their displays. Those people are above reproach.


Well, if the non believers would only be content with their second class status, we'd have none of these problems.
 
2012-12-02 07:58:33 PM  

JosephFinn: feckingmorons: It is a a bit silly, having a religious display on public land is not prohibited,

Actually, it is. 1st Amendment, no promotion of any religion or religions by the government.


Allowing any (as in any point of view, not restricting it to one or another) is not prohibited. I think you're talking about "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; "

Why people get all worked up about this is beyond me. If the Presbyterians want to have a Christmas display on the City Hall lawn let them as long as you let the Secular Humanists have a display on the lawn about evolution. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.
 
2012-12-02 08:08:07 PM  
www.planetcalypsoforum.com
 
2012-12-02 08:12:23 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: Revek: That you seek to tell us all how this unknown thing is this way rather than that way. In this respect you are identical to the theist. And how is it that the guy who wants in god we trust off the money is any different from the guy who want the nativity scene off the public land. To me, Both assholes. These things don't force you to go to church. They don't force you to believe. If it offends the eye then do not look upon it, My eyes see it all with equal doubt and I am not offended.

Boy, you like to generalize don't you?

Atheists are not trying to put non-science into science classes. They are not trying to put up monuments to E=mc2 or the laws of thermodynamics. Atheists do not knock on your door.

Everything an atheist does is easily not read, not watched, not listened to or walked away from.


So is Christian, and Jewish, and Muslim, and Wiccan.... After all, this is not 1984, and laws do go back to the Bible, and before that. Hammurabi anyone?
 
2012-12-02 08:15:57 PM  

Proteios1: I guess I'm just now realizing how vindictive and petty atheists have become. Sounds like they are the angry, vindictive, preachy arseholes forcing their values on everyone else. you know,what they claim everyone else is.


10/10, if we're going on amount of replies. 0/10 for content, complete lack of originality yet full of false assertions

Equal rights is not so much a value, as the most efficient means to peaceful civilization.

_____________________________

What I see as somewhat humorous, is that the wingnut section of religious people(in the US at any rate) has lost their ability to keep women down(aside from some leftover societal artifacts), losing the fight against keeping gays as second class citizens, and long ago lost the whole slavery issue, and because they're no longer able to wage actual war against other religions... have resorted to attempting to villify atheists to give the appearance that they're not the bottom rung of society.

Most jewish people really don't care much, and of the other religions that do, christians are allying themselves with the muslims in this fight against the "godless"(and women, and gays, and other races..down to bombing family planning clinics). Seriously the similarities between those two religion's societal views are staggering in number. How farked up is that?

How many christian zealots would shiat the proverbial brick if you gave them a detailed list like that?
 
2012-12-02 08:35:26 PM  

Proteios1: I guess I'm just now realizing how vindictive and petty atheists have become. Sounds like they are the angry, vindictive, preachy arseholes forcing their values on everyone else. you know,what they claim everyone else is.


Atheists are human. Just people. So if people sometimes seem petty, then atheists will sometimes seem petty. If people sometimes seem ignorant, then atheists will sometimes seem ignorant.

The important thing to remember is that these faults spring from being human, not from being atheist. Just as with Christians. The concept of being atheist is not inferior to any other state of being. The concept of being Christian isn't either. This is also something atheists would do well to keep in mind when the temptation to constantly bash Christians arises.

/agnostic
 
2012-12-02 10:09:32 PM  
God, I hate religious people. Atheists are the worst of them, though.
 
2012-12-02 10:29:30 PM  

letrole: Repo Man: Oh, and by the way? They went ahead and had the graduation prayer anyway .


Sounds like the standards of the community prevailed.


LOL. Now THAT's some trolling right there!

8/10
minus two for tardiness, but you found your groove in the end.
 
2012-12-02 10:43:35 PM  
We need to come up with some atheist Christmas carols so that we can spread some atheist cheer during the holidays.

♫Away in a manger, no crib for a bed.
The little Lord Jesus soon will be dead!
The stars in the sky look down where he lay.
The little Lord Jesus, an excuse to hate gays!♫

♫Oh come let us ignore him!
Oh come let us ignore him!
OH COME LET US IGNORE HI-IM,
Christ aint the Lord!♫

♫The first Noel, an angel they say
Was to ignorant shepherds in fields where they lay;
In fields, where they lay making up shiat,
On a cold winter's ni-ight what a bunch of twits!
Noel, Noel, Noel, Noel,
born is the myth of Israel!♫

♫Silent night, Wednesday Night
All is calm, but somethin aint right
Said she's a virgin
What the fark's with the child
Illegitimate infant, it looks like she lied
Sleeps with everbody-y!
Sle-eeps with everybody!♫
 
2012-12-02 10:56:52 PM  

ewurm: We need to come up with some atheist Christmas carols so that we can spread some atheist cheer during the holidays.


No. No, we do not.
 
2012-12-02 11:13:51 PM  

gadian: What happened to live and let live? All sorts of things go up on public land and I don't give a shiat. If I don't like the look of it, I don't look at it. Please don't fark up Christmas celebrations to a point to where no one gets the day off, guys.

/atheist
//If you take my Christmas day, I will CUT YOU!


This.

This is why I don't get all the complaints regarding Christmas. Nobody get's that many holidays off a year, why would you fark with that?

/hell, go out during any hunting season and you'll realize that most people have no idea what or where public land even *is*.
//hunters accidentally hunting on private land.
///non hunters complain about hunters who are actually hunting on public land completely legally.
//\: even my slashies facepalm
 
2012-12-02 11:27:44 PM  

ewurm: We need to come up with some atheist Christmas carols so that we can spread some atheist cheer during the holidays.


The example you give is rather hateful and bigoted. Try for less hate next time.
 
2012-12-02 11:34:45 PM  

dickfreckle: RDixon: Xmas.

That is all.

I more or less despise Christianity, but even I have the courtesy of calling it "Christmas." "Xmas" to me has always come across as extremely petty and needlessly caustic unless the person using is it using it as a genuine abbreviation (which was common long before the "War on Christmas" was even a phrase).

There are many factual ways to irritate Christians if that's your thing, without resorting to denigrating their holiday. I irritate Christians frequently, but only via rebuttal to stupid claims on their part. But stooping to that as an insult is pretty damn douchey if you ask me.

/only celebrates Lord Kimbo Day


I always thought the X was short for 'cross'. Never thought of it as a perjorative.

Still. I'm glad you've shown me that my willingness to offend Xtians renders me morally inferior to you, who only irritate them to the extent that you're OK with it. I feel ashamed now.
 
2012-12-03 12:01:00 AM  

Mambo Bananapatch: I always thought the X was short for 'cross'. Never thought of it as a perjorative.


X is the Greek letter "chi" (pronounced more like 'key' than 'chai'), and is an abbreviation for writing Christ in Greek (which is Χριστος or something like that, IIRC).
 
2012-12-03 12:01:02 AM  
If someone says that they believe that the moon is made of cheese, or that the government plots to fly planes into skyscrapers, or that the President is not a citizen, that person is rightfully branded as an idiot. When a person says that a Jew died in order that he be made a scapegoat, and that he was corporeally reassembled and will return again to save mankind, we should "live and let live". That's nonsense. That's not what Christians do. Christians set up their nonsense displays because it is advertising for their myth. They are constantly trying to use the law to advance their religion. The belief that life is eternal and that "the Lord will provide" leads to a decimation of resources and an absolute disregard for our environment. If the religious want to have their beliefs in their own home, or in their own church, then they won't have to hear from me. As soon as they make it public, or try to incorporate their religion into law, then they have chosen to be criticized. If that makes me an asshole, send me a t-shirt with "asshole" written on it, and I will wear it. There are real consequences to people's beliefs.
 
2012-12-03 12:06:51 AM  

ewurm: If someone says that they believe that the moon is made of cheese, or that the government plots to fly planes into skyscrapers, or that the President is not a citizen, that person is rightfully branded as an idiot. When a person says that a Jew died in order that he be made a scapegoat, and that he was corporeally reassembled and will return again to save mankind, we should "live and let live". That's nonsense. That's not what Christians do. Christians set up their nonsense displays because it is advertising for their myth. They are constantly trying to use the law to advance their religion. The belief that life is eternal and that "the Lord will provide" leads to a decimation of resources and an absolute disregard for our environment. If the religious want to have their beliefs in their own home, or in their own church, then they won't have to hear from me. As soon as they make it public, or try to incorporate their religion into law, then they have chosen to be criticized. If that makes me an asshole, send me a t-shirt with "asshole" written on it, and I will wear it. There are real consequences to people's beliefs.


"The most curious social convention of the great age in which we live is the one to the effect that religious opinions should be respected."
- H L Mencken
 
2012-12-03 01:37:14 AM  

cuzsis: This is why I don't get all the complaints regarding Christmas. Nobody get's that many holidays off a year, why would you fark with that?


No one really does screw with getting 1-2 weeks off for the holiday and new years. Everyone sane looks forward to the time off, kids to adults, religious and non. The holiday cheer and celebration is a big bonus.

Most of what we see / do is reaction to some zealotry born pushiness. It's an attempt to escort the belligerent and potential violent drunk out of the bar, or at least get him to lighten up. Sometimes that guy needs to be removed physically, sometimes he'll listen to a warning.

Like the christians who campaign for others to say Merry Christmas as vehemently as possible. "Happy Holidays" came about born of people being more open minded and fair(many religions and even non religious cultures find that deep dark part of winter a great excuse to party), and they take offense at that somehow, despite the positive sentiment conveyed, they blather on about how "It's farking christmas, you tell me merry christmas, not happy holidays, I love god and you should damn well know better!!1!!1!!" to random strangers, as if we all should know who to wish what kind of holiday to.

WTF is that about? Conceited farks. Can't we be happy with people just hoping we have a happy next few weeks? Apparently not.

No one is really putting christmas(or celebration of choice for that time of the year) in jeopardy by calling assholes out on their bullshiat, be it teaching bunk "science", striving for Dominionism, or just terrible freaking manners and people skills.
 
2012-12-03 01:44:03 AM  
Atheism is a religion. A religion is a belief in regards to spirituality and atheists actively choose to believe in nothing just as ignorantly and arrogantly as the worst bible-thumping christian moron throwback. Fanatic atheists are just as bad as fanatic .

Sadly, the truth of the matter is, no intellectual is an atheist because frankly, you cannot disprove a divinity no matter how hard you try, anymore than you can prove it. At best investigation, a sane man could merely shrug, wisely choose agnostic since it's impossible to know, thus making a choice would be pretty foolish, and hedge his bets.

But 99% of atheists aren't even atheists, they're just anti-christians, putting on aires. Not one of them would say a thing to a muslim, hindu, native american sachem, or whatever. I'm sure you're enjoying your holy days all the same!

The only thing I'm sure we'll agree on is that everybody should keep their religious beliefs to themselves unless asked, that includes atheists.
 
2012-12-03 02:04:13 AM  

Farking Canuck: There are two choices: Promote your views on private property or accept that views contradicting yours may be posted side-by-side with yours on public property.


It's not a parallel belief, it's a belief in the ridiculousness of the other guy's belief.
 
2012-12-03 02:44:00 AM  

Terrible Old Man: Atheism is a religion.


And that's where you lost any credibility as a sentient life form. But I'm bored and have some free time to burn while get my nic fix.

Terrible Old Man: A religion is a belief in regards to spirituality


Most people that identify as atheists do not have any spirituality as there is no more evidence for spirituality than there is for batman or the easterbunny. They don't take the time to bother with it because it sounds largely like a fairy tale.

It is not a "Belief in nothing", you're really pushing logic and language to the breaking point with that doublespeak.

Religion is like anal sex. People who practice it have various things they prefer, lube, condoms, bareback, stretching, stuffing, altar boys etc.

Atheists are non-participants, non-members. They simply don't do what those other people do with anuses.

It's not even really a choice, it's simple rational thinking. [Disclaimer: Not to say religion is irrational by necessary fact. Sticking with religion after carefully examining it's reason and history is another matter.]

Terrible Old Man: Sadly, the truth of the matter is, no intellectual is an atheist because frankly


Now, here is a common argument, again, a twist of logic based on a faulty assumption on your part. An Atheist doesn't believe, but does not by default deny the possibility. You may want to read up on some of the definitions of the words you use. Sure, there are some people that deny the possibility, but they are actually a minority of realized atheists(as opposed to the kind of atheist who just adopts the title for many reasons). To pretend all Atheists are that way is pure prejudice or bigotry, whichever term you're more comfortable wearing.

Terrible Old Man: But 99% of atheists aren't even atheists, they're just anti-christians, putting on aires.


Where do you get that figure?
Anyhow, if someone is anti-christian and that stance makes them examine the rational thought behind their stance and they become neutral toward religion itself and more anti-asshole, then it's a stage I'll gladly tolerate for a short time.

Terrible Old Man: The only thing I'm sure we'll agree on is that everybody should keep their religious beliefs to themselves unless asked, that includes atheists.


Seeing as how you BelieveTM that atheism is a religion, by your own words, you should keep your idea's to yourself as well.
 
2012-12-03 03:08:31 AM  

bigdanc: Farking Canuck: There are two choices: Promote your views on private property or accept that views contradicting yours may be posted side-by-side with yours on public property.

It's not a parallel belief, it's a belief in the ridiculousness of the other guy's belief.


So? It is their opinion that magic isn't real. They are allowed to post it.

Christians post that everyone who is not one of them is going to be tortured for eternity ... there is pretty much nothing more horrible or hateful that that bullshiat.

If you open up public property to opinions then you are going to get some you don't like. The government is not allowed to muzzle them ... it is called freedom of speech.

It is very simple. You have two choices: Either "nobody can present their opinion" or "everyone can present their opinion". But you guys want "only christians can present their opinion" which is unconstitutional.

It is pretty black and white ... sadly the reasoning skills of the religious are proven time and again to be lacking. This thread is a perfect example.
 
2012-12-03 03:45:39 AM  

untaken_name: God, I hate religious people. Atheists are the worst of them, though.


At least you've found a way to feel superior to them all and that's what really matters.
 
2012-12-03 03:46:40 AM  
DEATH TO ALL FANATICS!
 
2012-12-03 03:52:15 AM  
Freedom of religion, not freedom from religion

/not mine
//slashies
 
2012-12-03 04:29:09 AM  

scalpod: untaken_name: God, I hate religious people. Atheists are the worst of them, though.

At least you've found a way to feel be superior to them all and that's what really matters.


It's more than a feeling.

/more than a feeling
 
2012-12-03 05:04:43 AM  

Terrible Old Man: Atheism is a religion. A religion is a belief in regards to spirituality and atheists actively choose to believe in nothing just as ignorantly and arrogantly as the worst bible-thumping christian moron throwback. Fanatic atheists are just as bad as fanatic .

Sadly, the truth of the matter is, no intellectual is an atheist because frankly, you cannot disprove a divinity no matter how hard you try, anymore than you can prove it. At best investigation, a sane man could merely shrug, wisely choose agnostic since it's impossible to know, thus making a choice would be pretty foolish, and hedge his bets.

But 99% of atheists aren't even atheists, they're just anti-christians, putting on aires. Not one of them would say a thing to a muslim, hindu, native american sachem, or whatever. I'm sure you're enjoying your holy days all the same!


img.photobucket.com

So, by your reasoning, not believing in UFOs is a religion, right? What about not believing in dragons? That is a religion, too, right?
 
2012-12-03 05:25:10 AM  

Terrible Old Man: Sadly, the truth of the matter is, no intellectual is an atheist because frankly, you cannot disprove


I'll give you three guesses where one significant place is that you went completely wrong.
 
2012-12-03 05:48:15 AM  

Relatively Obscure: Terrible Old Man: Sadly, the truth of the matter is, no intellectual is an atheist because frankly, you cannot disprove

I'll give you three guesses where one significant place is that you went completely wrong.


Odds are still stacked against him...

Unless he's just trolling, of course. I've never seen the attraction to intentionally posting drivel in that manner myself(my drivel is come by honestly). WOW, you can fool anonymous strangers into thinking you're dense, what a life skill.
 
2012-12-03 06:08:24 AM  

omeganuepsilon: Relatively Obscure: Terrible Old Man: Sadly, the truth of the matter is, no intellectual is an atheist because frankly, you cannot disprove

I'll give you three guesses where one significant place is that you went completely wrong.

Odds are still stacked against him...

Unless he's just trolling, of course. I've never seen the attraction to intentionally posting drivel in that manner myself(my drivel is come by honestly). WOW, you can fool anonymous strangers into thinking you're dense, what a life skill.


i177.photobucket.com

Always relevant, in such cases.
 
2012-12-03 08:05:43 AM  

Ed Grubermann: craig328: It's about creating laws. It says they can't make a law establishing a religion or a law banning it. Using the amendment as an excuse to push one agenda or another in the guise of "it offends me" has been taken to the ludicrous extreme that we see today. Arlington national cemetery is public land as well...guess what you'll see all over the place there.

Graves marked with the religions of the people buried there. All of the religions. Including those with no religion.

Public land does not necessarily in and of itself mean no religious symbols whatsoever...mostly because it can be argued that banning such promotes atheism and is prohibiting the free exercise of religion.

Oh, look. Someone doesn't know the difference between secular and atheist. Typical whiny little God-botherer.


Actually Ed, it's about reading comprehension, a little more than your average, Fark-typical, mouthbreather IQ and not being a gigantic farking douuchebag...all of which you clearly fail. I've been in a church once in the past 15 years so "God-botherer" is much more a creation of your childish mind than anything resembling reality.

So, going forward, how about you stick to pumping the neighbor's dog rather than trying to engage your betters in discourse? You know, go with your strengths.
 
2012-12-03 08:08:36 AM  

Farking Canuck: craig328:
Arlington national cemetery is public land as well...guess what you'll see all over the place there. Public land does not necessarily in and of itself mean no religious symbols whatsoever...mostly because it can be argued that banning such promotes atheism and is prohibiting the free exercise of religion.

Arlington is an example that supports what happened in this story. Any group can be represented there which means the government is not endorsing one religion (which is constitutionally sound). The following symbols are available for gravestones there:

[img38.imageshack.us image 800x690]


Precisely what I was saying. The city did it right by simply declining all displays but the whiny, antagonistic atheists could do a whole lot better promoting their beliefs in humanity and science than simply devoting themselves to castigating the things they DON'T believe in.
 
2012-12-03 08:35:40 AM  

craig328: atheists could do a whole lot better promoting their promoting their beliefs in humanity and science


Welcome to 1776.
 
2012-12-03 09:09:59 AM  
To everyone who defends "In God We Trust" on currency:

How tolerant do you think you or other Xtians would be if instead it were changed to "Hail Satan!", "In Xenu we trust" or "Allah Akbar"? Yeah, I didn't think so.

It doesn't belong there, really. And if it's "not a big deal", why do you care if it gets removed?
 
2012-12-03 09:35:30 AM  

BSABSVR: Errk: Pork....

[thechive.files.wordpress.com image 500x375]

Why is there what appears to be a sedan on the right hand side of the nativity scene?


Sleeping camel (do NOT look that up on urban dictionary).
 
2012-12-03 10:27:36 AM  
Ok I don't really care about any of this, but... I do have one question for any hard core Atheist out there.
How can you prove a negative?
The few atheist I've met, all say pretty much the same thing, "There is no God, and only scientifically ignorant people would believe in such fairy tales about sky wizards."
OK, I can see that is a nice theory. Now how do you prove it?
 
2012-12-03 10:51:52 AM  

MonoChango: Ok I don't really care about any of this, but... I do have one question for any hard core Atheist out there.
How can you prove a negative?



How many times does this idiotic drivel need to be addressed? It gets asked and answered over and over ... can you people note read or listen??

You obviously have no concept of logic as you cannot understand that the burden of proof is on the people making the claim.

Can I prove:
- unicorns don't exist?
- Santa doesn't exist?
- Russel's teapot doesn't exist?
- flying, invisible pink elephants don't exist??

The answer to all of the above, including your question, is: I don't have to. The burden of proof is not on me ... it is on the people claiming they do exist. The default position on the existence of anything is: "does not exist" until proven otherwise.
 
2012-12-03 11:22:49 AM  

MonoChango: Ok I don't really care about any of this, but... I do have one question for any hard core Atheist out there.
How can you prove a negative?
The few atheist I've met, all say pretty much the same thing, "There is no God, and only scientifically ignorant people would believe in such fairy tales about sky wizards."
OK, I can see that is a nice theory. Now how do you prove it?


There is no god(within our grasp of understanding).

That's what any rational atheist will get down to if it's discussed in detail. We've got basic theory and reasoning for why we need to be lawful beings, where emotion and even matter(and then life) come from.

Why do we even need to talk about god? There is no question that man can come up with where god is a likely, much less, relevant answer that does not come off as some crackpot theory that makes leaps and bounds in jumping to conclusions, and ignorant of known science and theory built upon that.

So, why god?

Because your fairy tale(1 out of hundreds throughout the ages) of choice says we need one? Why that one? Why does that one get more credit than the others?

We're all atheists to a point, we just Believe in one less god than any other people. If anything, Atheists even are taking the safest route possible when it comes to the afterlife. Something something false gods. Well that's one sin we don't have a problem with, we don't worship any.
 
2012-12-03 11:29:07 AM  

omeganuepsilon: There is no god(within our grasp of understanding).

That's what any rational atheist



Deist.
 
2012-12-03 12:11:07 PM  

SkunkWerks: omeganuepsilon: There is no god(within our grasp of understanding).

That's what any rational atheist


Deist.


No, atheist.

Atheism is simply the absence of belief that any deities exist. Atheism is contrasted with theism, which in its most general form is the belief that at least one deity exists. (cribbed from the wiki, you should read it)

Most self identified atheists are non-religious, but accede that there is a possibility.

A modern Deist believes in and defines God(as an abstract being, but still, belief).(paraphrased from the wiki on deism for the sake of brevity).

The two concepts are not interchangeable, and not what I was referring to. So, please, in the future, if you don't understand, don't try to put words into my mouth. Just makes you look like a buffoon.
 
2012-12-03 12:21:04 PM  

omeganuepsilon: No, athdeist.


Thanks.
 
2012-12-03 12:25:30 PM  

omeganuepsilon: don't try to put words into my mouth.


You seem to have plenty of them in there, I agree.

You're still describing a deist, though.
 
2012-12-03 12:26:50 PM  

SkunkWerks: omeganuepsilon: don't try to put words into my mouth.

You seem to have plenty of them in there, I agree.

You're still describing a deist, though.


Also, I AM a buffoon. I'm comfy with this...

...mostly because I know the difference between an atheist and a deist.
 
2012-12-03 01:03:09 PM  
Nice post spammage. Didn't take your adderall today?

Not sure if troll or obsessed.
 
2012-12-03 01:26:15 PM  

MonoChango: Ok I don't really care about any of this, but... I do have one question for any hard core Atheist out there.
How can you prove a negative?
The few atheist I've met, all say pretty much the same thing, "There is no God, and only scientifically ignorant people would believe in such fairy tales about sky wizards."
OK, I can see that is a nice theory. Now how do you prove it?



You really don't prove negatives. The burden of proof is on those making the claim that something exists. People shouldn't just get to run up and shout, "Hey everyone, I have learned that we are being guided by a sentient pair of blue jeans travelling through the cosmos just out of reach of our scientific instruments, which I can speak to. If you can't prove I'm wrong, that means I win and I'm right."
 
2012-12-03 02:50:21 PM  

MonoChango: Ok I don't really care about any of this, but... I do have one question for any hard core Atheist out there.
How can you prove a negative?
The few atheist I've met, all say pretty much the same thing, "There is no God, and only scientifically ignorant people would believe in such fairy tales about sky wizards."
OK, I can see that is a nice theory. Now how do you prove it?


"I do not believe in a god" is not the same as "I believe that god does not exist." A lack of belief is not the same as actively disbelieving, and atheism is a lack of belief.

Also, based on your question, you cannot disprove the existence of Odin, Thor, Freya, Sif, Zeus, Apollo, Dionysus, Hera, Ra, Thoth, Bast, Isis, or dragons, unicorns, elves, orcs, ogres, pixies, Big Foot, Yeti, Santa, the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy, or 15-foot tall tripled breasted Amazonian hookers. I would bet you would say that none of those exist, right? But how can you disprove their existence? By your reasoning you must accept that they are all real, right? Do you now see the flaw of your argument?
 
2012-12-03 02:51:23 PM  

Relatively Obscure: MonoChango: Ok I don't really care about any of this, but... I do have one question for any hard core Atheist out there.
How can you prove a negative?
The few atheist I've met, all say pretty much the same thing, "There is no God, and only scientifically ignorant people would believe in such fairy tales about sky wizards."
OK, I can see that is a nice theory. Now how do you prove it?


You really don't prove negatives. The burden of proof is on those making the claim that something exists. People shouldn't just get to run up and shout, "Hey everyone, I have learned that we are being guided by a sentient pair of blue jeans travelling through the cosmos just out of reach of our scientific instruments, which I can speak to. If you can't prove I'm wrong, that means I win and I'm right."


You are wrong. We are guided by a teapot orbiting around the sun.
 
2012-12-03 04:28:22 PM  
Let us all join hands and agree that what little we we know about the vast universe is completely piddling compared to that universe. Likewise, let us agree that what we know about our home planet is also quite meager. So, if one considers this slim ratio of what we know, to what we don't know, maybe we should all be a bit humble when spouting off about what actually is. Let us celebrate the huge mystery that confronts us on this spinning magnetic ball, and do our best to push back the veil of what we do not know.

Personally, I find militant atheists to be just as boring as militant religious folks. It is the "militant" part that is boring.

Remember, the history of science is a history of mistakes, but with religion stuck on "faith" and believing rather than knowing . . . I will put my money on science, as flawed as it is.
 
2012-12-03 05:21:55 PM  

porkloin: Let us all join hands and agree that what little we we know about the vast universe is completely piddling compared to that universe. Likewise, let us agree that what we know about our home planet is also quite meager. So, if one considers this slim ratio of what we know, to what we don't know, maybe we should all be a bit humble when spouting off about what actually is. Let us celebrate the huge mystery that confronts us on this spinning magnetic ball, and do our best to push back the veil of what we do not know.


And because we don't know answers ... let's argue that magic must be real!!!

/love the logic of religious people
 
2012-12-03 06:14:24 PM  

Farking Canuck: Christians post that everyone who is not one of them is going to be tortured for eternity ... there is pretty much nothing more horrible or hateful that that bullshiat.


So a guy putting a nativity scene = him saying you're going to hell now?

"/love the logic of religious people," Farking Canuk

"If you open up public property to opinions then you are going to get some you don't like. The government is not allowed to muzzle them ... it is called freedom of speech."

No doubt. People in a functional society should know better, though.

"It is very simple. You have two choices: Either "nobody can present their opinion" or "everyone can present their opinion". But you guys want "only christians can present their opinion" which is unconstitutional."

This is where I say, Hasty Generalization and you say No true Scottsman! Also, see my above comment.

"It is pretty black and white ... sadly the reasoning skills of the religious are proven time and again to be lacking. This thread is a perfect example."

So we're attacking the person now too?

I haven't read this whole thread, I don't know how fired up you are, but your post was 100% knuckle-dragger man. I have every right to say, "hai guy yur dumb and what u think iz dum 2!"

But I wouldn't I respect your right to believe what you want to believe and I think that what you believe is right for you.
 
2012-12-03 06:54:32 PM  

bigdanc: So we're attacking the person now too?


I don't know about you but I definitely am. Of course it is in addition to the point ... which was made.

bigdanc: So a guy putting a nativity scene = him saying you're going to hell now?


It is one of the prime messages of christianity so you don't get to dodge it because it isn't explicitly spelled out in this display ... I'm sure it is on several billboards within 5 minutes drive of the site. It is told to us by the door-to-door harassers, the street-corner whack-jobs, and regularly by internet posters. The very concept of hell is the epitome of evil and any god that allows it to exist (much less who created it and uses it to satiate his sadistic needs) is evil.

bigdanc: No doubt. People in a functional society should know better, though.


Sorry ... you do not get to curtail what other people's free speech is because you think it is unpleasant. I am certain that slave owners found the 'everyone is created equal' speech to be very offensive. But it needed to be said.

bigdanc: This is where I say, Hasty Generalization and you say No true Scottsman! Also, see my above comment.


I am not generalizing. I am directly addressing the people who do not understand this simple concept: When it is government property either everyone gets a fair chance to post what they want or nobody posts.

It is very simple, it is very clear in law, and I stand by my opinion that anyone who cannot comprehend this simple concept has poor reasoning skills.
 
2012-12-03 08:36:34 PM  

Farking Canuck: It is one of the prime messages of christianity so you don't get to dodge it because it isn't explicitly spelled out in this display ... I'm sure it is on several billboards within 5 minutes drive of the site. It is told to us by the door-to-door harassers, the street-corner whack-jobs, and regularly by internet posters. The very concept of hell is the epitome of evil and any god that allows it to exist (much less who created it and uses it to satiate his sadistic needs) is evil.



Timothy 1:13
Even though I was once a blasphemer and a persecutor and a violent man, I was shown mercy because I acted in ignorance and unbelief.

Re: epitomizing evil - are you talking about the hell described in Dante's inferno?

So now we're saying Dante's Inferno = the bible/the word of god

And I'm pretty sure the prime message of Christianity is, "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets."

Matthew 7:12

You said: I am not generalizing. I am directly addressing the people who do not understand this simple concept: When it is government property either everyone gets a fair chance to post what they want or nobody posts.


And I getcha man. I know you're not wrong. The question is: are you acting ethically?

I try to live my life according to Matty 7:12, so I find harassing people for the sake of harassing them somewhat offensive and I think it to be unethical.

You're right though, it's hypocritical to force my christian values on other people, I should be luke 6:29'n it.
 
2012-12-03 09:02:26 PM  

Mock26: So, by your reasoning, not believing in UFOs is a religion, right? What about not believing in dragons? That is a religion, too, right?


Do they have international associations and meetings and clubs and message boards and a word people use to describe themselves based around this "lack of belief"? Then it's a religion. Oh, those things don't? Probably not religions, then. Atheism....yep, all those things. Religion. Sorry if you don't like it, but reality isn't influenced by your preferences. It is what it is. If it looks, acts, walks, quacks, and has the genetic profile of a duck, it ain't a liger, dude.
 
2012-12-03 09:09:24 PM  

bigdanc: Re: epitomizing evil - are you talking about the hell described in Dante's inferno?


I am talking about eternal torture with no end, no parole, no attempt at rehabilitation. The standard definition of hell as I have ever heard it defined,

This place is a vision of pure sadism ... no crime justifies endless torture. No benevolent being could ever condemn anyone to eternal punishment.
 
2012-12-03 09:29:32 PM  

untaken_name: Mock26: So, by your reasoning, not believing in UFOs is a religion, right? What about not believing in dragons? That is a religion, too, right?

Do they have international associations and meetings and clubs and message boards and a word people use to describe themselves based around this "lack of belief"? Then it's a religion. Oh, those things don't? Probably not religions, then. Atheism....yep, all those things. Religion. Sorry if you don't like it, but reality isn't influenced by your preferences. It is what it is. If it looks, acts, walks, quacks, and has the genetic profile of a duck, it ain't a liger, dude.


Then, fark is a church.

You are ascribing a personal definition, what "religion" means to you. Here's a hint, you don't know what you are talking about.

look up the definition of religion. You will not find "message boards" and "international associations" included.

What you can find those things under is cultural tools. A wish for society to be as good as it can is not a "belief" or a "religion". Talking about civil rights and equality is not a religion. It's survival instinct magnified, a study in cause and effect and reaching the best possible result for all beings(unless you're a republican, heh), not creation and spirituality. People with different goals, or different opinions about how to best reach the same goal, are not religious by necessity.

Sure, in the world of politics there is irrational theory abound, and while that bears a striking resemblance to religion, it is not quantitatively the same thing. They can even mix, what with morals and philosophy muddying the waters. But a mixture of two things does not make one the same as the other.
 
2012-12-03 10:18:14 PM  

smadge1: Atheists can put up their atheistic displays on their national atheist holiday seasons.

Fairs fair


So what if my particular flavor of atheism tells me that every day is an atheistic holiday for me? Could I just leave my display(s) up, on public land, ALL year round then?
 
2012-12-03 10:32:42 PM  

Farking Canuck: bigdanc: Re: epitomizing evil - are you talking about the hell described in Dante's inferno?

I am talking about eternal torture with no end, no parole, no attempt at rehabilitation. The standard definition of hell as I have ever heard it defined,

This place is a vision of pure sadism ... no crime justifies endless torture. No benevolent being could ever condemn anyone to eternal punishment.


On what are you basing your views of post-mortum morality? Do you believe in some type of afterlife? Have you experienced some type of afterlife? The Bible is very clear about how hell is "justified" and that's that God is the very embodiment of justice. I appreciate the approach you're taking - in trying to argue from a position of my belief, it shows maturity and a thoughtful approach, but if we're going to argue morality in the frame of the christian religion as defined by the bible the only guidance we have is the bible. What we're kind of doing here is cherry-picking evidence/logical starting points to support our arguments and that is pretty dishonest of us.
 
2012-12-03 10:56:33 PM  

Farking Canuck: The answer to all of the above, including your question, is: I don't have to. The burden of proof is not on me ... it is on the people claiming they do exist. The default position on the existence of anything is: "does not exist" until proven otherwise.


If it's an open question or discussion, yes. If a person says, "I don't know if God (or pink unicorns, or streetlights) exists", and you want to convince them otherwise, then it's your burden of proof.

OTOH, if a person flatly asserts, "God does not exist," then it's their burden of proof. (I do realize that many if not most atheists don't assert this, often precisely because they know that it's pretty much unprovable.)

Finally, if one person asserts, "God exists", and the other, "Goes doesn't exist", then burden proof is undefined because it's no longer a yes/no question.
 
2012-12-03 11:23:02 PM  

LL316: Lionel Mandrake: Revek: That you come in talking about how atheist don't do this or don't' do that but the truth is that they just do different asshole things.

For example?

Revek: I just simply don't care how wrong you are about the tendency of atheist to be just as uncompromising in their quest to be... Well assholes

When are atheists uncompromising?

When they demand that the Constitution be applied equally to all groups? When they fight to keep "Intelligent Design" out of science textbooks? When, like one guy sues over "In God We Trust" on the money? OK, that guy's an ass, but I happen to agree it doesn't belong there. Nevertheless, that is like ONE guy. Unless he's your neighbor or a relative, you can easily ignore the whole thing.

What exactly do atheists do but talk on a TV that you can turn off, and write books you don't have to buy, and chat in threads that you don't have to read?

Their douchiness is incredibly annoying. Isn't that enough reason to complain about them?


It isn't as annoying as the douchiness or derp from theists though...
 
2012-12-04 12:33:51 AM  

omeganuepsilon: untaken_name: Mock26: So, by your reasoning, not believing in UFOs is a religion, right? What about not believing in dragons? That is a religion, too, right?

Do they have international associations and meetings and clubs and message boards and a word people use to describe themselves based around this "lack of belief"? Then it's a religion. Oh, those things don't? Probably not religions, then. Atheism....yep, all those things. Religion. Sorry if you don't like it, but reality isn't influenced by your preferences. It is what it is. If it looks, acts, walks, quacks, and has the genetic profile of a duck, it ain't a liger, dude.

Then, fark is a church.

You are ascribing a personal definition, what "religion" means to you. Here's a hint, you don't know what you are talking about.

look up the definition of religion. You will not find "message boards" and "international associations" included.

What you can find those things under is cultural tools. A wish for society to be as good as it can is not a "belief" or a "religion". Talking about civil rights and equality is not a religion. It's survival instinct magnified, a study in cause and effect and reaching the best possible result for all beings(unless you're a republican, heh), not creation and spirituality. People with different goals, or different opinions about how to best reach the same goal, are not religious by necessity.

Sure, in the world of politics there is irrational theory abound, and while that bears a striking resemblance to religion, it is not quantitatively the same thing. They can even mix, what with morals and philosophy muddying the waters. But a mixture of two things does not make one the same as the other.


I'm really sorry you're butthurt about being religious, but that doesn't change the facts. Just because you wish things were different doesn't actually MAKE them different.
 
2012-12-04 12:38:17 AM  

Farking Canuck: bigdanc: Re: epitomizing evil - are you talking about the hell described in Dante's inferno?

I am talking about eternal torture with no end, no parole, no attempt at rehabilitation. The standard definition of hell as I have ever heard it defined,

This place is a vision of pure sadism ... no crime justifies endless torture. No benevolent being could ever condemn anyone to eternal punishment.


That comes from the Babylonian Mystery religion. The Hebrew Scripture describes complete obliteration as the "eternal" punishment for rebellion. It's not eternal in the sense that you are burning forever and ever, it's eternal in the sense that a cremated body is eternally gone. Note that I'm not defending this view, merely offering clarification. Going to Heaven and Hell after death come from other religions, not the Hebrew one. It's hilarious how many people who claim to be religious, basing their beliefs on the Hebrew writings, and they don't even know what comes from there and what comes from other religions. Sir Francis Bacon had a lot to do with that.
 
2012-12-04 01:37:01 AM  

untaken_name: I'm really sorry you're butthurt about being religious, but that doesn't change the facts. Just because you wish things were different doesn't actually MAKE them different.


Thanks for proving to us you're a troll who's not to be taken with any seriousness due to an unwillingness to discuss the matter with any intelligence.

Have a nice life sparky, but I suggest you return to your village before they put out a bulletin for the missing idiot.
 
2012-12-04 02:02:19 AM  

untaken_name: Mock26: So, by your reasoning, not believing in UFOs is a religion, right? What about not believing in dragons? That is a religion, too, right?

Do they have international associations and meetings and clubs and message boards and a word people use to describe themselves based around this "lack of belief"? Then it's a religion. Oh, those things don't? Probably not religions, then. Atheism....yep, all those things. Religion. Sorry if you don't like it, but reality isn't influenced by your preferences. It is what it is. If it looks, acts, walks, quacks, and has the genetic profile of a duck, it ain't a liger, dude.


So, the Elks and Masons and Moose Lodge and Boy Scouts and SCA and International Chess Federation and every single group of people that meets and has clubs and message boards is a religion? Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah ahahahaha!

And as for reality, it is not influenced by your preferences, either. So your claims that it is a religion are pretty much null and void!
 
2012-12-04 08:43:33 AM  

aerojockey: OTOH, if a person flatly asserts, "God does not exist," then it's their burden of proof. (I do realize that many if not most atheists don't assert this, often precisely because they know that it's pretty much unprovable.)


Since you acknowledge that the majority of atheists are not making the positive claim then you must agree that the burden of proof remains on the religious.

There is no value in making a case against a small fringe group that nobody takes seriously.
 
2012-12-04 02:26:55 PM  

aerojockey: OTOH, if a person flatly asserts, "God does not exist," then it's their burden of proof. (I do realize that many if not most atheists don't assert this, often precisely because they know that it's pretty much unprovable.)


No. They do not make the claim because that is not what they think. The truth is that they simply do not believe. It really is that simple.
 
2012-12-04 05:14:56 PM  

Mock26: aerojockey: OTOH, if a person flatly asserts, "God does not exist," then it's their burden of proof. (I do realize that many if not most atheists don't assert this, often precisely because they know that it's pretty much unprovable.)

No. They do not make the claim because that is not what they think. The truth is that they simply do not believe. It really is that simple.


Oh, the claim is made, but is not assertion of an unprovable point as framed there.

There is no Easter Bunny.
There is no Tooth Fairy.
Their is no invisiible Cheshire Cat.
There is no Bogeyman(though i suppose we do apply the title to human monsters)

I don't Believe those things, reason points to them as being accurate(so far). We all talk about those beings as if they exist, but in reality most people simply have no belief that they are real. It's a culture reference, or a humoring of people who do believe.

People like to create a polar opposite of Belief, but to attribute the same flaw of argument to make themselves feel better, but that is twisted logic in and of itself. It's a trick of language to imply "a belief in the negative", a trick, not a credible argument.

A statement of "There is no X" is most commonly a simplified paraphrase of "There is no evidence for X", which in turn is a simplification of "There is no evidence for X that is any more reliable than any other fable(a written story)...." the ... standing in for all the other discussion of "evidence" and simple reason as to why the idea is preposterous and debunking of religious claims that are asserted, etc.

It is to imply that if credible evidence were to surface tomorrow, and that people who say "There is no God" are guaranteed to ignore that evidence. That is a prediction that has zero basis in reality. It is a projection of the flaw that the religious zealot holds, that evidence and reason will be denied in some imaginary scenario, therefore both parties have at least equal flaw.

It's a bunk tactic. If evidence were to surface, it would not require belief, but acknowledgement of established and demonstrable fact.

Variants of the argument are:
You Believe in science.......... Placing trust in proven methodology is not Belief, but in reality the safest wager. Note here, when the prediction science makes fails, it's met with a restructuring of that methodology that led us astray, and an examining of the data to see what was missed.
You Believe in politic X...........A concern for societal future is not Belief, it's a form of survival drive. We desire a world that's good for us, and for our offspring.
You Believe in your children.......Confidence in our family is merely a positive outlook, because negative outlooks can be self fulfilling prophecies.

I believe the last time I had bacon was more than a week ago.(sadface)

That statement, as worded, is obviously a simple guess. I know it wasn't in the last few days, and it hasn't been a month...so...

Ad nauseum.

It's all an ignorant(or intellectually dishonest) equivocation on language to project that same flaw. Common parlance "belief" has a different meaning, indeed several, than the more technical and singular religious meaning of "reliance on something as fact with zero evidence"
 
2012-12-04 05:38:37 PM  

Farking Canuck: aerojockey: OTOH, if a person flatly asserts, "God does not exist," then it's their burden of proof. (I do realize that many if not most atheists don't assert this, often precisely because they know that it's pretty much unprovable.)

Since you acknowledge that the majority of atheists are not making the positive claim then you must agree that the burden of proof remains on the religious.


No, I don't agree that burden of proof ever "remains" with anyone. It changes depending on the question. It's absolutely not true that every question about the existence of God has burden of proof with the theist.

If the question is "Is there a God?" then burden of proof is on those who claim there is a God.

If the question is, "Is it a fact that there is no God?", then burden of proof is on those who claim there is no God.
 
2012-12-04 05:51:50 PM  

Mock26: aerojockey: OTOH, if a person flatly asserts, "God does not exist," then it's their burden of proof. (I do realize that many if not most atheists don't assert this, often precisely because they know that it's pretty much unprovable.)

No. They do not make the claim because that is not what they think. The truth is that they simply do not believe. It really is that simple.


I'm sure what you write is true, and really that simple, for some people calling themselves atheists, but I GUARANTEE you that a significant percentage of them privately believe in the non-existence of God. I'm not saying that to criticize; in fact, I respect those people because they recognize the impossibility of proof and so don't try to make claims they can't substantiate. And I'm certainly not trying to make some sort of argument that their belief in something they can't prove is a matter of faith. It might be for some, but every human being believes things they have no proof for. Lots of things. It's a human weakness.
 
2012-12-04 05:56:19 PM  

Farking Canuck: There is no value in making a case against a small fringe group that nobody takes seriously.


BTW, there are philosophies (Materialism is one that comes to mind) that do assert non-existence of God, and adherents of those philosophies are far from "fringe groups that nobody takes seriously".
 
2012-12-04 06:25:40 PM  

aerojockey: If the question is, "Is it a fact that there is no God?", then burden of proof is on those who claim there is no God.


Wrong, or rather, a dishonest question.

That question still originates with the original question, which originates from "There is a God".

Changing the form and twisting the words does not change that.

Without the claim, "There is a god" any supposed disbelief is irrelevant. That statement is the origin of the whole debate. If no one had ever made that out to be "fact", there would be nothing to debate about. Once that positive claim is made, all burden is on the claimant. Re-wording and pretending that claim doesn't exist simply does not work.

-----------------

Now, with credibility issues and rational reasons for a story as such to come into existance coming into play(gain status/leadership manage the "flock" etc). Occam's razor kicks in heavily. The reliability of the testimony is irrevocably tarnished. Call it establishing character, there is no shortage of lying and fabricating "fact" to gain status among the creature that is man. Why is one story as such more believable than others? It is not, they're all equally dubious.

Because so many people believe it? No, reality is not a democracy. The earth is not flat, and NEVER was. Discarded rags to not magically transform into mice or rats. Masturbation does not cause cancer. etc etc etc.

Those were all things that an ignorance populace once largely "believed" because it's what they were taught.

For any explanation of an alleged "god", there are simpler and more rational explanations that make actual sense.
Emotion, love? biochemists, hormones, medical study, that's all explaining it, down to why a parent bonds with it's child over children that are not it's own. Oxytocin down to survival / evolutionary advantages.

Rain, lightning, planets, stars, etc, it's all been touched on science to a degree that's built upon observable fact. What some call an educated guess carries with it a large amount of certainty a lot of the time. If I let go of this laptop, it will fall until it hits an obstruction. A simple prediction based on valid reasoning.

Religion has no such valid reasoning, despite it's claims and attempts. Still just the word of man, much of the literal parts having been demonstrated as tall tales, if not outright proven wrong, with science. Creationism, Noah's ark, etc. A fictional story based on real events is still a fictional story.

Yes, at one point the world didn't exist, does not necessitate Creation by an intelligent entity. Chemistry and physics explain it much more accurately.

Yes, there was once a large flood, several in fact, but a global one and a boat large enough to carry two of every sort of animal(and food and drinkable water, etc)? Preposterous.
 
2012-12-04 08:40:10 PM  

aerojockey: If the question is, "Is it a fact that there is no God?", then burden of proof is on those who claim there is no God.


Show me one person in this thread making this claim. If you cannot find anyone making this claim and, unless I missed something, you won't, why would you employ this argument??

If an argument doesn't apply to the people you are arguing against then it is intellectually dishonest to employ it.
 
2012-12-04 08:43:43 PM  

aerojockey: I'm sure what you write is true, and really that simple, for some people calling themselves atheists, but I GUARANTEE you that a significant percentage of them privately believe in the non-existence of God


That is completely true ... I do not believe in the existence of god.

This is a completely different thing from making the claim that no gods exist.

One is a position taken based on the weight of available evidence and the other is a statement of certainty (which is subject to the burden of proof).

If you ask religious people, the majority of them will state that it is a fact that god exists. The opposite is not true of atheists. Therefore we do not bear the same burden of proof. Full stop.
 
2012-12-04 09:12:57 PM  

aerojockey: Farking Canuck: There is no value in making a case against a small fringe group that nobody takes seriously.

BTW, there are philosophies (Materialism is one that comes to mind) that do assert non-existence of God, and adherents of those philosophies are far from "fringe groups that nobody takes seriously".


Philosophy isn't necessarily a way of life that is adhered to and therefore resembling religion, but many times simply an effort to describe, in that case, a conclusion that is reached naturally.

You are letting the -ism make it feel like a religion in that sense(an organized and structured group of people).

Equivocation of the various meanings of "philosophy" is the fallacy there.
 
2012-12-04 11:26:03 PM  

Farking Canuck: aerojockey: If the question is, "Is it a fact that there is no God?", then burden of proof is on those who claim there is no God.

Show me one person in this thread making this claim.

Why? Whether anyone's making the claim doesn't have any bearing on the truth or falsity of this statement.

 
2012-12-04 11:26:43 PM  

Farking Canuck: aerojockey: If the question is, "Is it a fact that there is no God?", then burden of proof is on those who claim there is no God.

Show me one person in this thread making this claim.


Why? Whether anyone's making the claim doesn't have any bearing on the truth or falsity of this statement.
 
2012-12-04 11:32:12 PM  

omeganuepsilon: Philosophy isn't necessarily a way of life that is adhered to and therefore resembling religion, but many times simply an effort to describe, in that case, a conclusion that is reached naturally.


Jesus. For people who claim to believe only what you have evidence for, you people are awfully good at reading into things things that aren't there.

I brought Materialism as an example of mainstream philosophy that asserts the non-existence of God. This was to counter to your opinion that people who assert non-existence of God that are a meaningless fringe group, and nothing more.
 
2012-12-05 01:10:18 AM  

aerojockey: Farking Canuck: aerojockey: If the question is, "Is it a fact that there is no God?", then burden of proof is on those who claim there is no God.

Show me one person in this thread making this claim.

Why? Whether anyone's making the claim doesn't have any bearing on the truth or falsity of this statement.


Fine ... let's derail this thread into a discussion of how christians like to murder doctors.
 
2012-12-05 01:30:37 AM  

aerojockey: omeganuepsilon: Philosophy isn't necessarily a way of life that is adhered to and therefore resembling religion, but many times simply an effort to describe, in that case, a conclusion that is reached naturally.

Jesus. For people who claim to believe only what you have evidence for, you people are awfully good at reading into things things that aren't there.

I brought Materialism as an example of mainstream philosophy that asserts the non-existence of God. This was to counter to your opinion that people who assert non-existence of God that are a meaningless fringe group, and nothing more.


aerojockey: (Materialism is one that comes to mind) that do assert non-existence of God, and adherents of those philosophies


Yeah, I'm the one with the reading issue.

Also, because you're confused, I'm not saying anything about some "fringe group", that is another poster.

If you'd actually, you know, read my posts, you'd see that I already covered "There is no god" people in a much different light.
 
2012-12-05 01:37:23 AM  
Bolded the wrong parts. It was the "adhering to" point that you had said and that I replied to.

One does not go down a list and pick a philosophy that they agree with and live by it's tenets. That is what you implied, and what I called you out on. There is no organization known as Materialism as you imply. There is no church, no worship. There is no large population of materialists, no clubs, no support groups, no community. All of which is what you imply by saying they're not a fringe group. You imply massive numbers.

A little bit of reading comprehension goes a long ways if you want to debate in a text based forum.
 
2012-12-05 03:43:00 PM  

Farking Canuck: aerojockey: Why? Whether anyone's making the claim doesn't have any bearing on the truth or falsity of this statement.

Fine ... let's derail this thread into a discussion of how christians like to murder doctors.


How is this sidetracking? Burden of proof is a part of this discussion, and I was commenting on that part of it. I'm not aware of any etiquette that says facts you introduce to the discussion have to always wholly pertain to everything that's been talked about so far.

omeganuepsilon: One does not go down a list and pick a philosophy that they agree with and live by it's tenets. That is what you implied,


No it isn't, and anyway I'm not sure what relevance you think it has to the point I was making. I admit "adherents" might not have been the best word. But regardless: someone claimed that those who assert the non-existence of God are a tiny group of people not worth even thinking about because they're so irrelevant. I say that's not true, and the fact that Materialism exists as a mainstream philosophy, taught in schools and everything, is evidence of that. That's it. That's all I said.

Do you deny that? Are you going to tell me that people who assert non-existence of God are as a whole tiny, irrelevant, and not worth thinking about, despite the fact that their philosophies are considered mainstream? If so, you're being ridiculous. If not, I don't see what you're objecting to, because that's ALL I was saying.
 
2012-12-05 03:55:05 PM  

omeganuepsilon: aerojockey: If the question is, "Is it a fact that there is no God?", then burden of proof is on those who claim there is no God.

Wrong, or rather, a dishonest question.


No it's not. Whenever someone makes an assertion, the approrpiate question is, "Is the assertion true?" If a man walks into a room and says, "There is no God", then the example above is the correct question.
 
2012-12-05 04:03:38 PM  

aerojockey: How is this sidetracking?


You are arguing against a tiny minority that are not even here. Pretty much admitting that you have no legitimate argument for the vast majority of atheists.

I guess this is better than most religious people on Fark who insist the 'you cannot prove god doesn't exist' argument applies to all atheists.
 
2012-12-05 05:12:36 PM  

Farking Canuck: aerojockey: How is this sidetracking?

You are arguing against a tiny minority that are not even here.


Let me tell you what I think is hilarious.

There are apparently a group (tiny according to you) of atheists you evidently don't want to exist, because you are unfathomably butthurt over the fact that I even bothered to mention them.

When I did mention them, I said that they are subject to burden of proof when they make their assertion, which (I assume) is one of the main reason you don't want them to exist, i.e., they're doing the same thing that religious nutcases do (assert things they have no hope of proof for), and worse, they are doing it while calling themselves the same thing you call yourself.

And yet when I pointed out what was "wrong" with them, you cried bloody murder, as if I was attacking the whole institution of atheism from top to bottom.

Persecution complex much? Seriously, you and your buddies on this thread have to have one to interpret what I said as "arguing against" anyone, as opposed to what I was really doing, just having a minor quibble with someone's oversimplified ideas on the burden of proof.

As for the other point of contention in this threa, namely my belief that the people you say are a tiny and insignificant group are not really tiny and insignificant, well tough. Everyone has people they don't approve of throwing in with them. Deal.
 
2012-12-05 05:20:33 PM  

aerojockey: As for the other point of contention in this threa, namely my belief that the people you say are a tiny and insignificant group are not really tiny and insignificant, well tough. Everyone has people they don't approve of throwing in with them. Deal.



So, do you have any citations that this is a mainstream group? Or is it just to be accepted as a fact that every athiest is an anti-thiest until proven otherwise?
 
2012-12-05 05:33:56 PM  

the ha ha guy: aerojockey: As for the other point of contention in this threa, namely my belief that the people you say are a tiny and insignificant group are not really tiny and insignificant, well tough. Everyone has people they don't approve of throwing in with them. Deal.

So, do you have any citations that this is a mainstream group? Or is it just to be accepted as a fact that every athiest is an anti-thiest until proven otherwise?


Persecution complex again. You're accusing me of saying all atheists are antitheists. I said nothing of the sort; in fact in my very Boobies in this thread I credited "many or most" atheists of not being antitheists. Lots of good that did.

As for citations, I don't have one handy, but if you go back in the thread that I gave the mainstrreamness of Materialist philosophy as evidence that antitheists are not a tiny and insignificant group. Since all I was saying was that people who assert non-existence of God are not so tiny as to be worth ignoring completely (which, you'll note, is not the same thing as saying that all atheists are antitheists--hard to believe, I know), then that bit of evidence will suffice to make my point. (Which, again, is NOT that all atheists are antitheists, which is totally not the point.)

BTW, I'm not saying that all antitheists are atheists. I just want you to know that. Or most atheists for that matter. Or even a healthy minor. Nope, not saying that either. Not completely insignificant number? Yeah I'll say that.

Which you'll note does not imply that all atheists are antitheist.
 
2012-12-05 06:05:42 PM  

aerojockey: As for citations, I don't have one handy, but if you go back in the thread that I gave the mainstrreamness of Materialist philosophy as evidence that antitheists are not a tiny and insignificant group.


So you cite your own comment as evidence of your assertion that they are anythng but a fringe group? If they were mainstream, shouldn't there be some evidence of that? The WBC is nearly universally acknowledged as a fringe group bordering on cult status, but even they have a larger visible following than the anti-theist movement.

Also, you're the only one looking for persecution here. I'm an ordained Christian minister, so I have nothing at all to gain by defending the athiests, but I don't feel that any valid point can be made for or against either side when it's based on erronious or nonexistent evidence.

/Yes, I do see the hypocrisy of that last statement, but I think my point still stands.
 
2012-12-05 06:23:36 PM  

the ha ha guy: So you cite your own comment as evidence of your assertion that they are anythng but a fringe group? If they were mainstream, shouldn't there be some evidence of that?


Since my point was that they are not a tiny enough group to ignore--which is what that Farking Canuck wants me to do--I feel the example of Materialism as a mainstream is sufficient evidence to make that rather small point. That Materialism is a mainstream philosophy is a commonly accepted fact, and I think you might be unfair to compare it to WBC, which is "mainstream" only in the sense that they get a lot of media attention.
 
2012-12-05 06:38:25 PM  

aerojockey: That Materialism is a mainstream philosophy is a commonly accepted fact


imgs.xkcd.com
 
2012-12-05 09:52:27 PM  

aerojockey: I feel the example of Materialism as a mainstream

What

example? You have yet to provide one.

You're making an unsubstatiated claim that there's some mainstream movement, when there is no evidence of them being anything other than a fringe type of personality, for surely there are some.

In my posts I also let on, at length, that saying "There is no god." is more figurative than literal, so you can't just say "Well a LOT of people say that". The way our language works is that some statements can mean multiple things. It's an argument of equivocation if you go that route.
 
2012-12-05 11:40:01 PM  

aerojockey: There are apparently a group (tiny according to you) of atheists you evidently don't want to exist, because you are unfathomably butthurt over the fact that I even bothered to mention them.


I am not remotely butt hurt.

I am simply pointing out that you are arguing with people who are not here ... apparently because you have no argument against actual atheism.

It is sad and pathetic that you cannot support anything you say. I asked you to produce one atheists from this thread that actually believes what you say we believe ... you produced nothing.

omeganuepsiilon has asked you several times to produce some support for your 'Materialism' claims ... you produced nothing.

You are a typical religious person ... attacking strawmen of your own creation because you cannot accept that your belief in magic is illogical and unsupported by evidence.

Go back to your mommy and daddy ... they'll tell you over and over that jesus loves you and that will make your weak mind feel better. It really is magic.
 
Displayed 476 of 476 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report