Options

Atheists: Please be quiet

1246726

Posts

  • Options
    tsmvengytsmvengy Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    YodaTuna wrote: »
    tsmvengy wrote: »
    Why is this turning into a religion vs. science debate? I think society as a whole has moved past the whole religion vs. science thing. I mean people who are young-earth creationists are really just a small fraction of people.

    If you want to talk "intelligent design" as being taught in schools, the way to combat that is not to denounce religion - it's to teach people what is science and what is not. Intelligent design is not science.

    You think society has moved past science vs religion?
    "In the United States, there was no statement commanding the assent of the majority of respondents: 35% of respondents preferred the evolution statement and 47% preferred the creationism statement, with 18% unsure."
    http://ncse.com/news/2010/07/polling-evolution-three-countries-005708

    You're wrong. Dangerously wrong. Creationists KNOW that Intelligent Design is not science, they are just trying to make it look like science to convince people in belongs in school. That was the whole point of the Dover case. They don't care that it's not science. Very few people have been conviced of creationism because of scienctific data (because there is none). Have you ever tried debating with a creationist? You can dump all the evidence for evolution at their feet and explain it to them step by step and they STILL won't believe it. They choose to be ignorant.

    As for the science vs reason debate. Reason is the logical underpinning of the scientific method. They go hand in hand, but you can use reason without science. Heliocentrism was an accepted idea, but never a reasonable one. There was never any direct evidence of it, just assumptions that were based on religious ideas.

    Uhh the sun IS the center of the solar system right? Or did they change that when they took away Pluto? :P

    tsmvengy on
    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    YodaTunaYodaTuna Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    FroThulhu wrote: »
    Pony wrote: »
    FroThulhu wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    FroThulhu wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    FroThulhu wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Julius wrote: »
    tsmvengy wrote: »
    Fuck, you can believe everything that science has taught us about how the world works and still believe in God. We have figured out the history of this universe back to something like 1 billionth of a second after the Big Bang, but we're drawing a blank before that. Stick God in there and you've got religion and all of science in harmony.

    And everything would be great if people just did that, I would still giggle at it but whatever.


    However, obviously people fucking don't do that. They have to fill entire books with bullshit about their god and what is good behaviour and what is not and shit.

    Define "people"

    Because plenty of folks DO do that

    Just because there are some loud idiots doesn't invalidate the rest

    I am, in fact, one of the people who do that. Because, sometimes, when the theory of relativity just ain't getting me through the day, I have to turn somewhere else. I also happen to be one of those people who doesn't give a fuck about the afterlife, because, ya know... you're dead, and there ain't a damned thing you can do about it.

    And, as to the bolded: why giggle? Because, I mean, an exploding ball of super-compressed whatnot works... except for the part where it apparently came from fucknowhere. That's pretty lul-worthy, really. Almost, almost as lul-worthy as a giant bearded man in the sky.

    I mean, I'm just sayin'

    So giggle at each other, then.

    Me, I'm an agnostic who would LOVE to believe in God, but can't do so without rational backing for it. I could go either way on the explanations. I'll giggle at both of you for jumping to conclusions.



    But hey, we can all get along perfectly well while giggling, no?

    What I'm saying is that I don't bother with the giggling. Right before the concept of the super-compressed matter that came from nowhere bounces off my funny bone, it's intercepted by a mesh net of "huh... well, time for lunch." Not putting the bearded guy in there is all well and good, but condescending to those who do is basically a dick move. Because, honestly, at that point there's no decent explanation and it really does creep into the land of utter strangeness.

    What's your aversion to giggling? Me, I think of "There Will Be Blood" as a comedy.



    People find humor in the absurd. Both of you find each other's explanations to be absurd. As long as you don't judge each other ON those explanations, there is no harm in those findings.

    That's the real key of it all. Not judging.

    But I don't find the big bang to be absurd. Because it seems like a good enough explanation, based on scientific evidence. What I find absurd is deriding people for believing something happened before that, something that isn't covered by science because, really, the big bang is the farthest back science can go with any degree of certainty.

    duder you know that the so-called "big bang" isn't even the scientific model that the majority of physicists even utilize anymore and hasn't been for decades

    right

    Well, fuck me! So, what's the new theory? I want to learn. Link me, sexy.

    I'd feel really foolish, except my basic assertion is that the origins of the basic material of the universe still has no definitive explanation. However, if I can read up on the present theories, I may have to re-evaluate my stance.

    http://news.carrentals.co.uk/new-research-may-overturn-big-bang-theory-34225974.html

    First article I could find on it. It's a pretty new idea and I imagine phycists are scouring over it already, but the essential idea is that there were multiple big bangs within our universe which has existed indefinitely. If true, it's one less gap that god can hide in.

    YodaTuna on
  • Options
    YodaTunaYodaTuna Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    tsmvengy wrote: »
    YodaTuna wrote: »
    tsmvengy wrote: »
    Why is this turning into a religion vs. science debate? I think society as a whole has moved past the whole religion vs. science thing. I mean people who are young-earth creationists are really just a small fraction of people.

    If you want to talk "intelligent design" as being taught in schools, the way to combat that is not to denounce religion - it's to teach people what is science and what is not. Intelligent design is not science.

    You think society has moved past science vs religion?
    "In the United States, there was no statement commanding the assent of the majority of respondents: 35% of respondents preferred the evolution statement and 47% preferred the creationism statement, with 18% unsure."
    http://ncse.com/news/2010/07/polling-evolution-three-countries-005708

    You're wrong. Dangerously wrong. Creationists KNOW that Intelligent Design is not science, they are just trying to make it look like science to convince people in belongs in school. That was the whole point of the Dover case. They don't care that it's not science. Very few people have been conviced of creationism because of scienctific data (because there is none). Have you ever tried debating with a creationist? You can dump all the evidence for evolution at their feet and explain it to them step by step and they STILL won't believe it. They choose to be ignorant.

    As for the science vs reason debate. Reason is the logical underpinning of the scientific method. They go hand in hand, but you can use reason without science. Heliocentrism was an accepted idea, but never a reasonable one. There was never any direct evidence of it, just assumptions that were based on religious ideas.

    Uhh the sun IS the center of the solar system right? Or did they change that when they took away Pluto? :P

    Everything changed! No, sorry I meant that people thought the Sun was the center of the universe, or the earth prior to that. Just because they were accepted ideas, doesn't make them reasonable ones.

    YodaTuna on
  • Options
    Fuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudFuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    science has nothing to say about truth

    it is not the pursuit of the truth; it knows it can never find or confirm truth; it is not interested in truth

    Only if your definition of truth comes from Ancient Greece or Germany.
    To elaborate:

    Science is rarely a neat A = B ---> A tidy ethical truth about our universe
    It's messy, complicated, sometimes hilariously simple, tedious, redundant, backwards, without logic, or very well reasoned out, and plain old has nothing to do with the reason you think it does.

    At the end of the day you have to have evidence, and an explanation of why that evidence supports one hypothesis over another (or why it doesn't).
    Once again, no one uses the word hypothesis in a lab.
    You haven't the faintest idea what you are going on about right now.

    Fuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud on
  • Options
    HamHamJHamHamJ Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    I'm pretty sure inflation is still the most commonly accepted theory.

    Whether or not inflation is the same thing as "Big Bang" anymore is a different question.

    HamHamJ on
    While racing light mechs, your Urbanmech comes in second place, but only because it ran out of ammo.
  • Options
    YodaTunaYodaTuna Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    Lawndart wrote: »
    So yeah, that kind of stuff does happen. It's hardly a justification for "all religion is stupid" evangelical atheism, but it's not like declaring yourself to be an atheist is without a social stigma in a lot of places.

    Some places? Everywhere. Atheists are the least trusted "minority" in the US behind Muslims and Gays.

    YodaTuna on
  • Options
    PonyPony Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    YodaTuna wrote: »
    http://news.carrentals.co.uk/new-research-may-overturn-big-bang-theory-34225974.html

    First article I could find on it. It's a pretty new idea and I imagine phycists are scouring over it already, but the essential idea is that there were multiple big bangs within our universe which has existed indefinitely. If true, it's one less gap that god can hide in.

    Cyclic models have existed for many, many decades. Even Einstein has postulated cyclic models.

    It's only been in the past few decades with the research in String theory that cyclic models have gotten "sexy" in physics.

    Personally, I'm a proponent of a cyclic model with a super-brane intersection, where observable physicality operates on a holographic principle.

    The "big bang" is not the be-all-end-all. It is not how "Science" sees the universe. It is a component of a variety of different cosmological origin theories, some of which are compatible and some of which are contradictory!

    Pony on
  • Options
    PonyPony Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    YodaTuna wrote: »
    Lawndart wrote: »
    So yeah, that kind of stuff does happen. It's hardly a justification for "all religion is stupid" evangelical atheism, but it's not like declaring yourself to be an atheist is without a social stigma in a lot of places.

    Some places? Everywhere. Atheists are the least trusted "minority" in the US behind Muslims and Gays.

    According to what?

    Some Vanity Fair poll?

    Honestly now.

    Pony on
  • Options
    EgoEgo Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    Ego on
    Erik
  • Options
    EvermournEvermourn Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    I went to an atheist meeting and I was terribly annoyed by the things they wordlessly mouthed.

    There are atheist meetings? I'm having trouble visualising it, what do they meet about?

    Evermourn on
  • Options
    mynameisguidomynameisguido Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    If atheists in general are somewhat shrill at times, it could be because a great number of us live in places where we can't necessarily be open about this fact and thus make us more prone to spew bile on theists than we might be otherwise.

    Edit: Where I live meetups with other atheists are a wonderful place to be able to speak freely without worrying about offending a theist.

    mynameisguido on
    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    PonyPony Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    If atheists in general are somewhat shrill at times, it could be because a great number of us live in places where we can't necessarily be open about this fact and thus make us more prone to spew bile on theists than we might be otherwise.

    man, Americans

    I feel sorry for you, son.

    Pony on
  • Options
    Fuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudFuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    Evermourn wrote: »
    I went to an atheist meeting and I was terribly annoyed by the things they wordlessly mouthed.

    There are atheist meetings? I'm having trouble visualising it, what do they meet about?
    To all talk about how they don't believe in god.
    Some were of the "Brights" type, which were probably the ones annoying me. Others had just had terrible experiences with religious parents, so it was also a support group. I heard the word "sheep" a few times and decided to not listen anymore. Then they brought in a theologian turned atheist, who talked about incredibly esoteric fallacies in Christian philosophy. They had some goooood food though.

    Fuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud on
  • Options
    FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    edited December 2010
    Fartacus wrote: »
    OP (snip)


    fartacus.jpg

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.

    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • Options
    YodaTunaYodaTuna Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    Evermourn wrote: »
    I went to an atheist meeting and I was terribly annoyed by the things they wordlessly mouthed.

    There are atheist meetings? I'm having trouble visualising it, what do they meet about?

    I would assume mostly about political issues, seperation of church and state and discriminatory actions. No one talks about atheism in general. There isn't anything to talk about. I'm pretty big into those debates and slapping around creationists and stuff like that, but I don't like even having the word atheism. We don't have a word for people who don't believe in the tooth fairy. In my perfect universe, the word wouldn't exist. I also struggle with idea of these meetings. On one hand, it does nothing to dispel the myth that "atheism is a religion" on the other hand, groups are more effective at bringing about change than individuals.

    YodaTuna on
  • Options
    StericaSterica Yes Registered User, Moderator mod
    edited December 2010
    Atheist meetings can be very hit and miss due to the diversity of backgrounds. It can be a nice place to get support and help if you're in an area hostile to atheism. Or it can be a place where people bitch about being told Merry Christmas.

    Sterica on
    YL9WnCY.png
  • Options
    mynameisguidomynameisguido Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    Pony wrote: »
    If atheists in general are somewhat shrill at times, it could be because a great number of us live in places where we can't necessarily be open about this fact and thus make us more prone to spew bile on theists than we might be otherwise.

    man, Americans

    I feel sorry for you, son.

    We have an extreme amount of theists here so it's a little more extreme than it is in America in general.

    Hell, half my uncles are pastors and church officials of some kind.

    mynameisguido on
    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    EvermournEvermourn Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    FroThulhu wrote: »
    Toxin01 wrote: »
    I'll be quiet as soon as people stop whispering about my atheism in school like I just openly announced I like to rape dead puppies.

    I went through this in school, when I was an atheist. Now that I'm a Christian

    I'm not trying to be inflammatory, but could you elaborate on your progression from atheism to becoming religious? As someone who went in the other direction, I find it hard to imagine. What started moving you in the religious direction?

    Evermourn on
  • Options
    HonkHonk Honk is this poster. Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited December 2010
    Man Feral if that's your actual date of birth I'm really surprised. It just seems like you know a lot about everything and hold a reasonably point of view on all subjects. I kind of pictured you like Gandalf.

    Honk on
    PSN: Honkalot
  • Options
    PonyPony Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    YodaTuna wrote: »
    Evermourn wrote: »
    I went to an atheist meeting and I was terribly annoyed by the things they wordlessly mouthed.

    There are atheist meetings? I'm having trouble visualising it, what do they meet about?

    I would assume mostly about political issues, seperation of church and state and discriminatory actions. No one talks about atheism in general. There isn't anything to talk about. I'm pretty big into those debates and slapping around creationists and stuff like that, but I don't like even having the word atheism. We don't have a word for people who don't believe in the tooth fairy. In my perfect universe, the word wouldn't exist. I also struggle with idea of these meetings. On one hand, it does nothing to dispel the myth that "atheism is a religion" on the other hand, groups are more effective at bringing about change than individuals.

    This is a general problem with student groups and activism groups and the like

    which is everyone lumping complex groups of issues together under one unifying trait

    aside from being atheists you could disagree with everyone else there about everything which could make any form of political or social activism problematic at best

    see: Members of the Tea Party who are Atheists and also Libertarians, who are deep in bed with American Evangelical Christianity because... well... REAGAN MAN, FUCK OBAMA, etc. etc.

    being an atheist is, in and of itself, not a significant statement of your social or political viewpoints, so an atheist group focused on activism is likely to be implosive as nobody can agree on anything aside from "we don't believe in gods"

    i mean, shit, i'm atheist but i'm also religious as not all religions are theistic and being atheist does not really make a statement one way or the other on your larger viewpoints on things like religious faith or metaphysics

    it just says "i don't believe in god"

    so, for example, I can stand with most atheists when they decry Creationism

    but when some of them (by that I mean, Atomic Ross) call religion "the worst thing in the world"

    i am like

    hey wait a second, buddy

    Pony on
  • Options
    StericaSterica Yes Registered User, Moderator mod
    edited December 2010
    Honk wrote: »
    Man Feral if that's your actual date of birth I'm really surprised. It just seems like you know a lot about everything and hold a reasonably point of view on all subjects. I kind of pictured you like Gandalf.
    I'm surprised Fartacus has so many fans.

    Sterica on
    YL9WnCY.png
  • Options
    Casually HardcoreCasually Hardcore Once an Asshole. Trying to be better. Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    Pony wrote: »
    Well, have you seen how Atheists are described?

    http://conservapedia.com/Athiest

    I've seen people nearly run away when there's an atheist in the house. There's such a huge irrational fear towards atheists that it's amusing. But, this picture sums it all up:

    atheist-cartoon.gif&t=1

    where the fuck do you live that this sort of shit happens?

    don't just say "The Bible Belt" either because i've learned that term is meaningless bullshit, every American atheist thinks they live in the Bible Belt

    Denver Colorado.

    I don't know why you're surprise. Some people cross the street when they see a group of black guys approaching them. No difference.

    Casually Hardcore on
  • Options
    PonyPony Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    yet another reason I'm happy I don't live in the US.

    Pony on
  • Options
    lonelyahavalonelyahava Call me Ahava ~~She/Her~~ Move to New ZealandRegistered User regular
    edited December 2010
    I just.

    Sigh.

    I have a hard time lately defining myself. I was born and raised Jewish. I've fallen in and out of the 'religion' part of that a few times over the years. But I still identify myself as Jewish.

    But God? Yeah, sure. There could be a god out there. Or something. So maybe i'm more Agnostic? Or just a Theist in general? Or is it Deist?

    But I still hold onto my Jewish rituals, roots, and traditions. I still identify myself as being Jewish and following more in line mystically and spiritually with the Jewish line of thought.

    It's not a practicing religion, for myself, I don't go to synagogue as often as I should, or even as often as I might like to. I don't need to. I know, for the most part, my religion and my beliefs.

    I often have a hard time vocalizing or explaining them, but I do know them. And they are a part of me.

    But they're not all of me. I'm not just, Ahava Jewish Girl. I believe in science and reason and logic and philosophy (although I try not to think too hard on that, it hurts sometimes). I can see the beauty of other religions and I find myself fascinated with wanting to learn about them.

    And Atheism is just atheism. You don't believe, then don't believe. That's fine. I'm not going to beat you or make fun of you or anything. I'll probably just shrug and ask if you want to play some dominion.


    I just don't get why that's so difficult. Just be tolerant. Of everybody. On both sides.


    great, now i'm setting myself for a religious identification crisis. thanks guys.

    lonelyahava on
  • Options
    StericaSterica Yes Registered User, Moderator mod
    edited December 2010
    I don't know about that, pony. You can still rally for a narrow cause, which for many of these groups is simply awareness and a bit of PR. While you may be more spiritual than I, we can still organize a campaign to tell people that being an atheist isn't a bad thing in and of itself.

    Sterica on
    YL9WnCY.png
  • Options
    PonyPony Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    lonelyahava, I identify myself as Jewish, even though I don't really follow the religion of Judaism.

    I am ethnically and culturally Jewish, Jewish customs and rituals and stuff are a part of my childhood, and one that is the source of happy memories!

    So, I'm comfortable as identifying myself as a Jew ethnically, just not

    you know

    religiously.

    Pony on
  • Options
    Fuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudFuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    I go to church sometimes and sing
    everyone knows I'm an atheist though
    one time I put my foot in my mouth by complimenting Unitarians on their ability to really downplay the religion aspect of their services
    then I got angry glares because apparently other religious groups always knock on them for it
    ):

    Fuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud on
  • Options
    Casually HardcoreCasually Hardcore Once an Asshole. Trying to be better. Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    Pony wrote: »
    yet another reason I'm happy I don't live in the US.

    Yeah, I've been tossing around the idea of living elsewhere for a bit. Maybe study abroad, if I can afford it.

    Maybe Switzerland or Sweden....

    But you have to remember, America didn't have stuff like the Dark Ages or the Crusade to humble our belief in religion. In fact, a lot of the religious crazy from across the pond came to America so they can continue doing their crazy religion thing.

    Casually Hardcore on
  • Options
    FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    edited December 2010
    Honk wrote: »
    Man Feral if that's your actual date of birth I'm really surprised.

    It's not. It's Stefani Germanotta's.

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.

    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • Options
    PonyPony Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    Rorus Raz wrote: »
    I don't know about that, pony. You can still rally for a narrow cause, which for many of these groups is simply awareness and a bit of PR. While you may be more spiritual than I, we can still organize a campaign to tell people that being an atheist isn't a bad thing in and of itself.

    Sure, but I don't really know how much that is required. I mean, that's highly dependent on where you live, I guess.

    Where I live, I don't need to make people believe atheists aren't baby-eating monsters. People don't act like that here. Well, I'm sure some people do, but nobody gives a shit what they think.

    I'm guilty sometimes of forgetting that Americans have to deal with the political pressure and societal violence of evangelical Christianity in a way that Canadians do not at all.

    But, to be fair, American atheists are also sometimes guilty of taking their personal gripes and negative experiences with Christianity and the shitty way the Republican Party has turned into the fist of the Christian Right

    and forgetting that actually most of the rest of the world doesn't have those problems.

    Pony on
  • Options
    lonelyahavalonelyahava Call me Ahava ~~She/Her~~ Move to New ZealandRegistered User regular
    edited December 2010
    see, i'm kinda in the middle of that Pony. I identify both ways. Just not... as religiously as possible? I guess?

    I don't eat pork for the most part, but sometimes it can't be avoided and then i get sick for a few hours.

    I still say my Shema every morning and every night before going to bed, Facing East to Jerusalem.

    But, its my own Judaism. That's right for me.

    bah, sorry for highjacking.

    lonelyahava on
  • Options
    tsmvengytsmvengy Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    Ego wrote: »

    The word atheist currently means "anti-religious zealot" so any attempt to take these polls to mean "people hate people who aren't bible thumpers!" is unfounded.

    tsmvengy on
    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    YodaTunaYodaTuna Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    I just don't get why that's so difficult. Just be tolerant. Of everybody. On both sides.

    The problem is there is a disagreement on what being tolerant means. Seperation of church and state is inherantly the most tolerant option. However religion believes it has a priviledged status, it worships god. God's wishes are more important that the rules of the state. What is a non-religious person suppose to do in this enviroment? If we wish a state sponsored nativity scene taken down, we are now being intolerant of Christians. But that's not really intolerant is it?

    YodaTuna on
  • Options
    override367override367 ALL minions Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    Robman wrote:
    Our science minister got openly mocked in the national newspapers for refusing to avow his belief in Evolution

    Not to back up so much in the thread but... why wouldn't he? I mean, evolution is fact, outside of here in southeast wisconsin where most biology professors won't talk about evolution because "it's controversial".

    override367 on
  • Options
    mynameisguidomynameisguido Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    I'm sure there's a ton of issues that a group of atheists can agree upon, though in a place where atheism is the norm it obviously wouldn't make much sense.

    Where I am, it's way more of a support group, due to (and apologies for the metaphor here) how "closeted" many are about their (lack of) belief.

    mynameisguido on
    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    YodaTunaYodaTuna Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    tsmvengy wrote: »
    Ego wrote: »

    The word atheist currently means "anti-religious zealot" so any attempt to take these polls to mean "people hate people who aren't bible thumpers!" is unfounded.

    Haha. Have a perfectly open, but non-aggressive, atheist run for office and tell me how that works out for you. You don't even have have him say "I'm an atheist." Just have him say no when someone asks if he believes in god.

    YodaTuna on
  • Options
    lonelyahavalonelyahava Call me Ahava ~~She/Her~~ Move to New ZealandRegistered User regular
    edited December 2010
    YodaTuna wrote: »
    I just don't get why that's so difficult. Just be tolerant. Of everybody. On both sides.

    The problem is there is a disagreement on what being tolerant means. Seperation of church and state is inherantly the most tolerant option. However religion believes it has a priviledged status, it worships god. God's wishes are more important that the rules of the state. What is a non-religious person suppose to do in this enviroment? If we wish a state sponsored nativity scene taken down, we are now being intolerant of Christians. But that's not really intolerant is it?

    Honestly?

    who cares about the nativity scene. It's plastic and wood and other materials that's there for a week? maybe two? or maybe the whole season.

    Who cares?

    ok, I do tend to get myself upset around christmas time because all you see is christmas christmas christmas and after a while, as a non-christian, it makes me want to kinda kill somebody a little bit.

    but, honestly, it's there, it happens, it's over, and then it's gone again.

    The town wants to put up a nativity scene, then let them put it up. You can put in a protest, you can get permission to put up a scarecrow, what have you.

    But I (personally) don't think that some plastic or wood figures on a lawn someplace is really all that bad. You're not being forced into anything with them, and the town isn't going to stone you or burn you at the stake for not going and paying homage to the plastic baby jesus with a lightbulb in its tummy.

    lonelyahava on
  • Options
    PonyPony Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    Personally, I don't think you can be against so-called "state-sponsored displays of religion" like a nativity scene on the grass of the State Senate house or something

    and also

    at the same time

    be in favor of state sponsorship of the arts.

    Pony on
  • Options
    YodaTunaYodaTuna Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    I'm sure there's a ton of issues that a group of atheists can agree upon, though in a place where atheism is the norm it obviously wouldn't make much sense.

    I just want to point out that I knew a white supremcist atheist. It was odd.

    YodaTuna on
  • Options
    lonelyahavalonelyahava Call me Ahava ~~She/Her~~ Move to New ZealandRegistered User regular
    edited December 2010
    YodaTuna wrote: »
    I'm sure there's a ton of issues that a group of atheists can agree upon, though in a place where atheism is the norm it obviously wouldn't make much sense.

    I just want to point out that I knew a white supremcist atheist. It was odd.

    Rule 34?

    lonelyahava on
This discussion has been closed.