E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
This Dec. 4, 2011 photo shows avowed atheist Damon Vix in front of the display he set among other, traditional holiday displays in Palisades Park in Santa Monica, Calif.
Damon Vix didn't have to go to court to push Christmas out of the city of Santa Monica. He just joined the festivities.
The atheist's anti-God message alongside a life-sized nativity display in a park overlooking the beach ignited a debate that burned brighter than any Christmas candle.
Santa Monica officials snuffed the city's holiday tradition this year rather than referee the religious rumble, prompting churches that have set up a 14-scene Christian diorama for decades to sue over freedom of speech violations. Their attorney will ask a federal judge Monday to resurrect the depiction of Jesus' birth, while the city aims to eject the case.
"It's a sad, sad commentary on the attitudes of the day that a nearly 60-year-old Christmas tradition is now having to hunt for a home, something like our savior had to hunt for a place to be born because the world was not interested," said Hunter Jameson, head of the nonprofit Santa Monica Nativity Scene Committee that is suing.
Missing from the courtroom drama will be Vix and his fellow atheists, who are not parties to the case. Their role outside court highlights a tactical shift as atheists evolve into a vocal minority eager to get their non-beliefs into the public square as never before.
National atheist groups earlier this year took out full-page newspaper ads and hundreds of TV spots in response to the Catholic bishops' activism around women's health care issues and are gearing up to battle for their own space alongside public Christmas displays in small towns across America this season.
"In recent years, the tactic of many in the atheist community has been, if you can't beat them, join them," said Charles Haynes, a senior scholar at the First Amendment Center and director of the Newseum's Religious Freedom Education Project in Washington. "If these church groups insist that these public spaces are going to be dominated by a Christian message, we'll just get in the game — and that changes everything."
In the past, atheists primarily fought to uphold the separation of church and state through the courts. The change underscores the conviction held by many nonbelievers that their views are gaining a foothold, especially among young adults.
The Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life released a study last month that found 20 percent of Americans say they have no religious affiliation, an increase from 15 percent in the last five years. Atheists took heart from the report, although Pew researchers stressed that the category also encompassed majorities of people who said they believed in God but had no ties with organized religion and people who consider themselves "spiritual" but not "religious."
"We're at the bottom of the totem pole socially, but we have muscle and we're flexing it," said Annie Laurie Gaylor, co-president of the Wisconsin-based Freedom from Religion Foundation. "Ignore our numbers at your peril."
The trouble in Santa Monica began three years ago, when Vix applied for and was granted a booth in Palisades Park alongside the story of Jesus Christ's birth, from Mary's visit from the Angel Gabriel to the traditional crèche.
Vix hung a simple sign that quoted Thomas Jefferson: "Religions are all alike -- founded on fables and mythologies." The other side read "Happy Solstice." He repeated the display the following year but then upped the stakes significantly.
In 2011, Vix recruited 10 others to inundate the city with applications for tongue-in-cheek displays such as a homage to the "Pastafarian religion," which would include an artistic representation of the great Flying Spaghetti Monster.
The secular coalition won 18 of 21 spaces. The two others went to the traditional Christmas displays and one to a Hanukkah display.
The atheists used half their spaces, displaying signs such as one that showed pictures of Poseidon, Jesus, Santa Claus and the devil and said: "37 million Americans know myths when they see them. What myths do you see?"
Most of the signs were vandalized and in the ensuing uproar, the city effectively ended a tradition that began in 1953 and earned Santa Monica one of its nicknames, the City of the Christmas Story.
The Santa Monica Nativity Scenes Committee argues in its lawsuit that atheists have the right to protest, but that freedom doesn't trump the Christians' right to free speech.
"If they want to hold an opposing viewpoint about the celebration of Christmas, they're free to do that — but they can't interfere with our right to engage in religious speech in a traditional public forum," said William Becker, attorney for the committee. "Our goal is to preserve the tradition in Santa Monica and to keep Christmas alive."
The city doesn't prohibit churches from caroling in the park, handing out literature or even staging a play about the birth of Jesus and churches can always set up a nativity on private land, Deputy City Attorney Jeanette Schachtner said in an email.
The decision to ban the displays also saves the city, which had administered the cumbersome lottery process used to award booths, both time and money while preserving the park's aesthetics, she said.
For his part, Vix is surprised — and slightly amused — at the legal battle spawned by his solitary act but doesn't plan anything further.
"That was such a unique and blatant example of the violation of the First Amendment that I felt I had to act," said the 44-year-old set builder. "If I had another goal, it would be to remove the 'under God' phrase from the Pledge of Allegiance — but that's a little too big for me to take on for right now."
The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees freedom of speech and religion, but also states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." That has been interpreted by courts as providing for separation of church and state, barring government bodies from promoting, endorsing or funding religion or religious institutions.
More content from NBCNews.com:
- New York City extends gas rationing through Thanksgiving holiday
- Monkey killed by blow to head during zoo break-in
- Body found at scene of oil platform explosion in Gulf of Mexico, Coast Guard says
- NTSB: Warning signals activated before vets' float pulled onto train tracks
- 6 officers injured when 2 police helicopters collide in Pasadena
- Video: Who is Holly Petraeus
Leave a Comment:
Let's pause for just a moment to reflect on the following journalistic train wreck:
"Resurrect." Once in the article, twice in the poll. Really? It had to be that word. Really?
Damn those religious conservative MSM spin doctors :)
Christians want to be persecuted so badly. I'm pretty sure they were poking the lions with sticks.
Ha the hell with it .... so many Christians so few lions.
I am sure many will read this and try to read things into my statements that are not intended. I am not trying to support or suppress the beliefs of others, although I firmly support the Constitution. In order to interpret what the Constitution is saying you first need to understand its purpose.
It was written to:
It appalls me when I hear an American say our Constitution calls for the separation of Church and State. This is a concept straight from the Communist Manifesto; used to abolish all religion because religion gives allegiance to something other than the state. Our Constitution states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." This was clearly written to limit government powers, not individual freedoms.
This article points to a bigger problem in our society, problems of the ego. One problem of the ego is arrogance, but an even bigger one that plagues our society is those who feel the need to play antagonist and get some sort of sick thrill from the resulting anger. Damon Vix appears to be such a man (as do many of the posters here). I (along with the Constitution) am for the right to free speech, until that right is just being used for the sole purpose of invoking anger in others (trying to incite riotous behavior). I’m sure Mr. Vix does not believe in Santa or Frosty-the-Snowman, yet he is not attacking these figures, just the symbols of the religious holiday (and I bet he celebrates Christmas) that religious followers set up. I see nothing wrong with allowing displays of menorahs, nativity scenes, Santa, reindeer, Santa’s elves, Burger-Meister-Meister-Burger, or any other Hanukah/Christmas memorabilia in the spirit of the holidays (these things have never violated my rights); but to create some display of a flying spaghetti monster for the sole purpose of mocking others strong beliefs is wrong, because it is then creating a controversial and angry environment around me, thereby disturbing my peace and tranquility. I would fully understand many behaviors, up to and including violence, if the religious zealots were oppressing the rights of others, but they are not. They are simply putting up displays of the foundation of their religious holiday that we have chosen to celebrate (we have made Christmas a federal holiday).
For those who want to argue over Christmas being a religious holiday, I will just say this: I understand the whole concept of the Christians establishing a church in Rome and converting Roman holidays into Christian holidays in order to gain following. However, i twas that Christian holiday of Christmas that has carried over into our culture, not some Roman feast.
What made this country great at one time was that we were “The Great American Melting Pot,” a single cultural blend of all the cultures that came to this land; we had unity! We have become a stew; chunks of potato, carrot, onion, and beef; a conglomeration of subcultures that try to maintain their separation from the broth.
The government and the "church" should not be separate?
Which church, exactly should be part of the state?
Jesus is not mentioned anywhere inthe Constitution, but you think you get to use government resources to push your particular religion on everyone else? There is a "Christian" church on every corner in this country. How many mangers do you need?
Do you even understand what happened here?
No one sued the government to keep "Christ" off governmnet property. They just asked for equal time for all religions. Do you mind an Islamic display on the city square? How about my totem pole?
The CITY made the decision, not atheists.
BTW, the phrase "Separation of Church and State" came from Thomas Jefferson, one of the most important "founding fathers", but YOU are so much smarter than he was, aren't you?
Thanks to Constantine, the Roman holiday of Christmas has been carried over into our culture. As long as the religious display are on private land I have no problem. When they are on public land the government to whom that public land "belongs" is seen as promoting that religion and hence violates the separation of church and state, which IS in the Bill of Rights whether you like it or not. Be appalled all you want, this country was NOT founded as a Christian country, but one with values taken from Christianity, English common law an Hammurabi, to name just three sources. I, for one, will continue to work at keeping the Church and the state as separate as possible, given that some Christian churches have chosen to enter the political arena without paying the necessary dues (taxes).
Mjka
Good try but you are full of it.
So did Martin L King, Loretta Young and other activists seeking an equal opportunity.
This Christian holiday may well have originated in its current name as such but in human history it is not the only reason for celebration this time of year. Just because the Christian hijacked the occasion does not mean they own it.
I, an atheist, enjoy the holiday season with my family with an X-Mas tree, shopping, decorations and all but there is no religious significance for us, just a time to be thankful for surviving and having each other. Keep it that way and we will have no issues.
Sam
By today standards Thomas Jefferson was a Terrorist.haha!
paragus
By today's religious standards Thomas Jefferson would be a Democrat and the devil.haha!
You lost me right there, because our Constitution DOES call for a separation of Church and State. In fact, Jefferson wanted a WALL of separation between Church and State. There is a large body of letters and speeches that spell out what they meant. And, lo and behold, you have Google! You can research it yourself!
Sam, thank you for proving my point, and with such anger too. You took a small piece of my statement and turned it into a stand-alone statement, then argued against it. I never said that any church should be part of the state, simply said that i find it appalling that people use a statement that is not in our constitution, but claim it is. I further stated that the governmental document that i am aware of that contains this statement is the Communist Manifesto (a connection that I find intriguing due to our nations continuous move towards socialism over the last few decades under both Democratic and Republican guidance). A statement once made by Jefferson is not a government document, nor does it carry meaning without the rest of what he said (speach in which he said it in would give frame of reference). Secondly, Mr. Vix is not trying to "get equal time for other religions," he just wants to insult religion to be insulting.
Oh no, MLK was not someone that just wanted to antagonize, he fought against injustice and cruelty, and if his ways were an irritant to those who perpetrated the cruelties, that's great. That is in no way a parallel to a display put up by people during their religious holiday. What cruelty is perpetrated on me because of this? Is it forcing me to live in squalor, or eat in unsanitary conditions? Are the police looking the other way as the Christians assult me? I can go on, but the point I am trying to make is, for you to equate this with the black struggle for rights sickens me. Martin Luther King was a great hero that gave his life so others could have freedom, Damon Vix is an antagonist.
Where did you see the anger, please point it out to me. Show me where Sam showed anger in his post. Let's talk about you and the anger in your heart, shall we? Better yet, lets talk about your agenda. You seem to think that you have all the answers in the world figured out, good for you. Realize that you only have them figured out for yourself, and many disagree with your opinions. You are an obvious sociopath.
Not anger. Just logic which eludes you.
You're the one who is "appalled". You can't have freedom of religion without separation. It's logically impossible. It has NOTHING to do with "abolishing all religion".
No Jew, Agnostic, Muslim, Atheist, or Pastafarian is calling for the abolition of all religion. That concept comes strictly from Christians witha a persecution complex.
If government allows one religion to use public resources to promote their religion, they have to let ALL religions use the same public resources to promote their religion. Since no one can define which religions are real and which ones aren't that means pretty much ANYTHING that someone wants to call religion as long as they profess "faith" in it.
From a constitutional view, my totem pole is just as legitimate as Christianity. I honestly don't mind if you have a manger scene on public property as long as I can put my totem pole up too. The same privilege must apply to Muslims, Wiccans, Satanists, Pastafarians, Hindus etc etc.
Maybe I misunderstood you. Is true "Freedom OF Religion" ok with you? If so, then we agree on what "Freedom OF Religion" means.
Separation of church and state IS in the Constitution. It is clearly implied by the 1st Amendment and the SCOTUS interpreted it as such in their landmark case: Reynolds v. US (1878). Even the Founding Fathers argued there is a separation of church and state.
The SCOTUS used Jeffereson's reference as a "declarative authority" when rendering their decision in the aforementioned Reynolds case.
Merely your opinion.
Yet, you apparantly do not understand what the constitution is saying, its intent, or the intent of the Founding Fathers who drafted it!
Help! My statue is bleeding! What should I do?
Plaster Band-Aids? Super-Glue? Build a fence around it and charge admission? Definitely route the blood to the nearest drain or sewer.
Sam
You must be catholic..call the false pope..lol
Sell it on EBAY.
It is great that people want to stand up for their beliefs, I completely understand not everyone is christian. But I really wish in teh process of everyone have the equal right of showing their beliefs they would quit trying to stomp out my belief in Christianity...they are pssing me off and that is not very Christian like.
Also Iwouldlike to see some traditions hold up in this country, we have become so selfish , me me me...A little tradition never hurt anyone.
kjh, Well, gee, when Christians stop trying to stomp out my beliefs I will leave them alone. This includes the rude people on my doorstep, on my phone and in my email. Simply take "no" for an answer and stop trying. These Christians are almost as bad as Democrats and Republicans.
DieHardCentrist
There are thousands of Christian churches in this country.
There are 10 Christian churches within 5 minutes from my house. There is nothing an atheist can do to stope them all from putting up a manger. There aren't any atheists that WANT to stop them from putting up a manger. How many manger scenes do you need? How much difference will ONE MORE on the courthouse lawn make?
Give me a freaking break.
sam, I agree. It seems that Christians need to "proclaim" in as many places as they can get away with and then complain when someplaces are put off limits. Poor Christians. Boo hoo.
@kjh: ...The sad, needy Obamasites just get all bent out of shape when they see anyone celebrating anything that's honestly good, like Christmas. ...Merry Christmas to you, @kjh!
I see you are still upset about how the election turned out. Don't worry, you can just delude yourself that your guy won... it just takes some faith, and mental acrobatics to believe in something there is no evidence for. Which is a lot like religion, actually.
getagrip: "We lost, get over it, move on." - Barbara Bush
I am surprised getagrip hasn't been banned yet for spamming. I guess that speaks for the tolerance of Atheists and Agnostics and even Deists.
@pj: ...Nope, you're just surprised that EVERYONE WITH A VIEWPOINT OPPOSED TO YOURS HASN'T BEEN BANNED. ...LMAO!!!
You didn't even read my point of view, did you getagrip1? You are just on here spamming and LMAO, yet I am guessing your A is not off yet. In fact, I would say that it has been firmly planted next to your computer and has not even seen the daylight today. Go out and get some fresh air! It will do your mind and body good. This is the board I checked in on for both breaks and lunch, and now I am home. It saddens me that you have been on it all day. Don't you have anything better to do? Can't you volunteer your time somewhere?
Heres my thought...all the churches can put nativity scenes in front of the churches...every home can have a nativity scene in the yard, if they want......the athiest can put a picture of satan in their yard....or whatever they want....don't mess with my church or my yard mr or mrs athiest......
What does this have to do about people's yards?
Agreed, since the whole article is about religious displays on PUBLIC land.
Read the article. No one is trying to "mess" wiht your church or your yard. Don't mess with my park.
Why would an atheist put up a picture of satan? Atheists don't believe in any supernatural entities. I don't know of any atheist that had messed with a private religious display, however I have heard of some religious folks defacing a pro-atheism sign.
ronster....the picture was of many different "deities" that people throughout history have believed in...some that are now considered by pretty much everyone as mythical (Zeus) and some that people still believe in "Satan" and asking if anyone can state a good reason why things like Jesus and Satan is any different from Zeus, etc. that nearly everyone accepts as myth now. It was not a sign saying Satan is real or to glorify Satan in any way.
For years I resented evangelicals. Nothing was worse to me than being chased across a parking lot by someone who was intent on handing me their printed propaganda. However, athiests are just as bad. Why can't they just 'not believe' in silence. What is this insisting that everyone else live by their belief system? How does that make them any different than the various religious groups? Fine! You don't believe! So shut up about it!
As long as the believers shut up too.
Why can't you just believe in silence?
What is this insisting that everyone else live by their belief system?
Fine. You believe it. So shut up about it.
I'm not a christian, so I'm not included in the "you" you are referring to. I just don't find it necessary to make a scene over other people's believe in Christ. That being said, I also find something about the holiday season that is infectious. People walk with a lighter step and smile more often. How can that be a bad thing?
People in opium dens are all smiling too.
Not that it matters, but suicide peaks during the holidays, and empirical measures of mood consistently show people are the most stressed and unhappy during the holidays.
Merry Christmas, Hanuka, winter solstice, etc.
If that were true. Didn't someone die last year in a Walmart stampede? I have just started to like the "holiday season" again when we toned it way down and made it about family and fun. If people really believed that Jesus was the son of God, would they be out on Black Friday fighting people for the 1/2 priced X-Box or would they be giving that money that they spend on friends and family to charity? The messages in the New Testament are clear, yet how many Christians really follow them. I am an agnostic, but I can see the value of the New Testament. Why to Christians, who should be following the New Testament, resort to the Old Testament when they want to control others?
The funny thing is, many Atheists and Agnostics have read and studied the Bible (and other religious text), most "Christians" have not.
The ultra conservative Christians have brought this on themselves with their insistence that everyone must accept their beliefs. Even moderate Christians disagree with the right wing stand against birth control, abortion in cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother, and a multitude of other beliefs.
Ultra conservative Christians are becoming as obnoxious as some of the homosexual radicals who demand their right to do or say anything no matter how offensive it is to others, including other homosexuals.
The above statement is going to result in outrage from the bible thumpers having to see themselves called as offensive as loudly outspoken homosexuals, but their positions are as offensive to many as the homosexuals are to the bible thumpers. Maybe its time for both groups to just shut up!
And let us include the militant atheists in that wish . . .
As an atheist I think everyone should have an opportunity to use those spaces. If christians don't mind sharing then I don't really see an issue. I think more important issues are at hand such as creationism in schools and women's rights than to be wasting time on this stuff. I like christmas displays personally, they can be aesthetically pleasing, I could care less about the meaning behind it.
Do you christians mind sharing the space with other religions? If you answer yes then I am with you!
I am in total agreement with you. I'm not religious, although more agnostic than athiest. However, every year I go see Transiberian Orchestra. I find the music pleasing. I think you are on to something. I would actually like to see more from other religions. It might actually foster more religious tolerance to see how others celebrate their religious holidays.
That's how I feel about it too. As long as people of ANY belief or lack of a theistic belief get equal opportunity and time, I'm fine with it. It seems to be the Christians (as has been so well shown in many of the comments here) that have a problem with anyone else but themselves getting equal say, time, and space. It was the atheists' displays that were being vandalized, not the Christians' which caused this issue in the first place. I'm perfectly fine as an atheists with Christians displaying their beliefs on their own personal property or church property even if I personally think the world would be better off without any religion and think it's all rather silly. I don't go and knock on their door and tell them that or put pamphlets in their mailbox saying that. I leave them alone. They have every right to do what they want on their own property. I don't even have a problem with it on public property IF other beliefs are given the same and equal right to display their beliefs. That seems to be where Christians have a problem. They seem to be fearful that any display other than Christian ones are a danger to their continued existence. Hmmmm....maybe there's a reason they're so fearful. Any time atheists (or anyone of any belief system other than Christianity) try to get their equal time the Christians start screaming about being oppressed or others trying to snuff them out. It got old a long time ago. If Christians want others to respect their beliefs then they need to start respecting others. A good example is on my FB page. I post some posts with Atheist/agnostic themes....I invariably get someone making a rude or challenging comment to them....guess what I do when I see one of them post something of a religious nature? Nothing. I don't comment. I leave it alone. I scroll past it. I respect their right to post whatever they believe on their own page. If only Christians would do the same and get over their persecution delusion.
Apparently the Christians did mind a lot since they vandalized the other displays.
Wingnut Christians are so psychologically insecure that they can't seem to handle the fact that not everyone is a member of their cult.
You know what would really be ironic? What if the athiest displays were actually defaced by athiest themselves. Think about it. That would be a very effective way to stir the pot....
I happen to like people who are likeable. I dislike people who are hateful. Period.
@Kdog: ...It wouldn't be the first time that Obamasite "protected species" like the gay and godless created phoney hate crime scenes to get sympathy for their causes.
You know what would be even more ironic? If Christians were tolerant of other's beliefs.
In Texas, they're not. They don't just want their manger scenes on the court house lawn, they want they're holy books verses IN the courthouse. They want their holy book in public school SCIENCE classes. They want to remove science from the public school science books because it conflicts with their "beliefs".
I don't care if you believe in Jesus. Do you mind if I believe in Biology, and Geology, and Astronomy?
@sam: ...Ever considered moving to California?
getagrip,
Is the United States Constitution different in California?
@sam: ...Answer my question first.
you had a question? I thought it was incessant BABBLE
Atheist fight so hard to have freedom from religion, yet they fail to recognize that they themselves are a religion and like all religions they try pressing their beliefs on everyone else.
I do give credit to Atheist because it takes more faith not to believe in a God then it does in believing a God exist.
To quote a previous post...
Atheism is a religion like "off" is a TV channel.
...Freedom From Religion is just like "Freedom From Blacks" or "Freedom From Orientals" or "Freedom From Native Americans" and on and on and on. ...It is nothing more or less than close-minded segregation, public land or not!
Only from your perspective. For others the reverse is true, e.g. what if you have chosen to believe in the wrong god?
Obviously you are completely ignorant about what atheism or agnosticism is really about. You spout the same tired untrue stereotypes. Atheism is a religion like abstinence is a sex position and it takes absolutely NO faith for me to not believe in a deity that there is no evidence for whatsoever. Please do some research and learn what something is really about before spouting nonsense.
So..it takes more faith to not believe in Allah than it takes to believe in Allah? How about Zeus?
Besides, I DO believe in Thor. Can I put his statue in the park? He wasn't born in December, just like Jesus wasn't born in December.
Henry, your comment is so textbook christian it's funny. No, Atheism is not a religion, just as much as being a fan of a football team is a religion. We don't worship anything. I think that's a prerequisite for any religion.
And you are saying it takes more faith to not take things completely on faith? Interesting logic you have there....
Getagrip.
Then you don't mind if I put my totem pole on the courthouse lawn every December? I don't mind your manger, if I get to put my totem pole up too.
Seems fair to me. After all, I have freedom "OF" religion too, don't I?
You will believe what you want to believe and I will believe what I want to believe. The fact is that it takes faith to believe which ever belief you or I chose!
@sam: ...No, not at all. ...Although, the fact that you would choose to place your totem on the courthouse lawn, intentionally, at the same time others traditionally had a Christmas tree there, would cause me and others to question your true motives. ...LOL! ...Actually, in my neck o' the woods we DO place a totem pole in our city park during a certain time in the spring.
So, no. ...If you and your group placed a totem pole on the courthouse lawn with no malicious intent, that would be fine with me and just about everyone else I know here. ...However, we tend to be a lot more tolerant than most folks I know or know of in California these days.
getagrip
No surprise log and reason befalls you.
so are Blacks, Orientals and Native Americans attempting to force others to be one of them?
Dumb illigocal comment.
getagrip is obviously a racist since all of the examples are racial in nature. By the way grip - argue with the courts. The rest of us mere minions don't really have a SAY
It doesn't take any faith at all to "not know", or to "not really care".
The atheist didn't sue to stop Christians from putting up their display. He just wanted to put up his own display. It's not an attack on your religion or your religious freedom. It's just an expression of his own religious freedom. I don't understand why you would deny me the right to put my totem pole in the park.
It's about the constitution, not religion.
@Oh: ...The folks with their manger are not trying to force you to be "one of them". ...LMAO!!! ...They are just trying to celebrate Christmas by sharing their culture. ...Get a grip! ...Just like Blacks, Native Americans, etc. are not trying to force you to be one of them by merely being visible and sharing their culture with you.
@put: ...By giving different races as an example of sharing culture, I am just trying to communicate with you Obamasites on your own level. ...Unfortunately, with the short threshold Obamasites have for logic, you ususally revert to inevitably labelling anyone with an opposing point of view as a "racist". ...LMAO!!! ...Get a grip!
@sam: ...I said I wouldn't mind you putting the totem pole up. ...Please read my earlier post. And, above all, get a grip!
To be fair, getagrip hasn't always been a racist, he's spent his entire day being a homophobe......it's just recently that he's become a racist. That's the advantage of being one of the 'superior Christians', you're allowed to look down on everybody who doesn't think and act just like you. Or who lives on the west coast. Or is black. Or voted for a different candidate. Oh, heck with it, he looks down on everybody.........
@Jeff: ...LMAO!!! ...Still sore, eh? ...LMAO!!!
Sore? About what? You being a homophobe, a racist, and a fool? That just makes me feel sorry for you. About you spewing your biased garbage out on everyone else? Again, that just makes me pity you more, that you believe that you have something intelligent or insightful to say, and that people attach any weight to it.
@Jeff: ...Like I said, still sore, eh? ...LMAO!!!!
I have a grip - a good one - when it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, lays a duck's eggs and associates with other ducks, it's almost a certainty that it IS a duck
It's not much engaging in a battle of wits with an unarmed person
No, getagrip, still just pity....as you say,repeatedly....LMAO (not WITH you, AT you...)
Wrong and wrong! Atheism is not a religion, and they are not pushing anything on anybody. They simply want to make sure the separation of church and state is respected and they reject dogmatic nonsense and indoctrination.
No it doesn't. It just takes logical thinking and a rational mind. No faith is required or necessary. By all means, prove there is a god!
Yet, atheism is NOT a belief. And belief does not equal fact.
And a troll too. Don't forget that one.
Perhaps a matter of trivia for some, it should still be stated that atleast two groups, the Buddhists and the Unitarians, believe that religion and aetheism are compatible.
It should also be stated that at least one group thinks Jesus is coming back in a space ship.
Yep...I've been to a Unitarian Universalist fellowship....it was the only even semi-religious place I've been to in this country where I was able to say that I'm atheist without being afraid of being condemned, pummeled with hate speech, have people attempt to "convert" me (and then get angry or insult me when I refuse to) or at best look at me like I have two heads. A very nice place for atheists/agnostics to go if they desire some type of "fellowship" but not religious dogma.
actually, for many Buddhist sects, there is no REQUIREMENT for a "supreme mythical entity", likewise, no PROHIBITION, either. It's not the DESTINATION, it's the JOURNEY that's important. The process of achieving enlightenment
...Oh, I see. ...The "trendy" religions are OK with these folks. ...LMAO!!!
LMFAO AT YOU, not with you
Well I wasn't always a believer, so who am I to judge the world? However after receiving some verse's from the Bible which were, " For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, say's the Lord, thoughts of peace and not of evil, to give you a future and a hope.Then you will call upon Me and go and pray to Me, and I will listen to you. And you will seek Me and find Me, when you search for Me with all your heart. Jer.29:11-13 NKJV
I was open and objective; I conducted what I called an experiment; As my plan was suicide and I figured that if God was real I needed to know before I did this, as I did not want to end up in Hell. So I began praying, reading the Bible and going to Church. My main prayer was, " Lord what is it to seek you with all of my heart? How do I acheive this? If You are real I want to find You. I was 36years old at the time, it was 1997, within 6 months of my search for truth I was bapisted in the Holy Spirit, one of many powerful experiences I have had with God. I have seen miracles, healings and much more. Having had No prior religious experience God was my teacher, along with those whom He brought into my life. I know that I could never have deserved what He has done for me and I was chief sinner my whole life.
If God would save me as horrible as I was, no one, and I repeat no one is beyond His touch. It is not His desire that anyone should be lost, but you must search with all of your heart if you are to find the truth. He will show Himself to you should you do this, as He is really not far away at all. And He loves you right where you are, I don't care what you've done, as while we were yet still sinners, Christ died for us. He will change you for the good as He loves you and wants to be seen through you so that others would simply come to Him and be saved. The devil is the liar and the father of all lies and deception, don't believe him, search for yourself for 1 year and you will know the truth and the truth will set you free.
If you do not search for the truth, then you do not have the ability to judge what is truth and what isn't. You have nothing to lose and everything to gain, what can it hurt to try.
pascal's wager doesn't work with intelligent people.
Good for you.
Suicidal people and death row inmates seem to find Jesus more often than happy, well adjusted people. I don't know why that is, and I don't care.
A lot of people have alreadY searched for the "truth" and found Islam, haven't they? They seem to be just as sure as you are that they've found the "truth".
You both have a right to your "faith". I searched for the truth and found it in a 16 ft tall totem pole. I just want to exercise my constitutional right to "freedom OF religion".
Is that ok?
Pascal's Wager is also a logical fallacy. Besides JRS, what if you believe in the wrong god?
What are the beliefs of an Atheist? Show me a God doesn't exist. Show me how this world was created from nothing. And I don't want your circular reasoning, I want facts! Then tell me your beliefs don't take faith to believe in them!!!
My totem pole is God and created the universe in 1 day.
Show me that it's not true. I want facts!
....and I DO have faith that my totem pole created the universe and He did it in only ONE day and didn't even need to rest afterward.
An atheist (that isn't just bitter at religion) will readily admit that a god may exist, but clearly a god as envisioned by all major religions is impossible. Further, given the lack of evidence in a god, the most probable likelihood is that no god exists.
Thus, we don't believe in god, but are open to altering our belief were any credible evidence provided for the existence of a god. Just like I don't believe a huge meatball is orbiting the earth right now... it's possible, but highly improbable.
you miss the point henry - in LOGIC, proof is of a PREMISE - not that a premise is incorrect. You don't prove non-existence. Prove that the tooth fairy doesn't exist. LOGICAL FAILURES are just that FAILURES
It doesn't include god/s or the supernatural! Why don't you believe in Odin or Zeus or the FSM?
A logical fallacy: you can't prove the non-existance of something. Show me god does exist!
Show me that "god did it!" Besides, this world wasn't created "from nothing." It was actually created from the coalescense of gas and dust that existed in the solar system billions of years ago.
You first!
After 2 1/2 centuries of unquestioned cultural dominance of social America, I have very little sympathy for ANY American christian claiming being a victim in any way.
Christians came to America to escape persecution for their religious beliefs and then immediately began persecuting people for their religious beliefs.
I truly want to be a Christian, but I have some questions...
Can I marry my 13 year old cousing and her 11 year old sister?
Are they allowed to cut their hair?
Can I use electricity?
Can I go to the doctor if I have cancer?
Are snakes required?
What should I do if a statue starts bleeding?
If I'm the first person to see Jesus when He returns, who should I call? The Pope, or Joel Osteen?
It's all so confusing....
There's balance in the universe. Without the atheists counterbalancing the religious zealots the earth would be thrown off its rotation and the "End of Days" would be here. I predict this will be December 2012 to match the prophecies of the ancient Mayans. Don't fret, send me money. I have secured 12 seats with Richard Branson to take the chosen to Kobol.
...LMAO!!! ...The Obamasite anti-religion zombies here crack me up!
...I know it's wrong to laugh at retarded people. However, I think these Obamasites are really retarded BY CHOICE. They were not born that way. ...LMAO!!!
Are you upset at being so thoroughly schooled? Your comments are being refuted repeatedly, and you don't even get it. It's sad, and does nothing but amuse us (with a heavy dose of pity thrown in).
Here is some friendly advice, stop your foolishness and take what little dignity you have left and reflect upon this. Or don't, and be a source of entertainment for us; your choice.
yeah grip - you were so successful at being ignored the first time that you tried again.
blah, blah, blah?? BLAH!!
@Eng: ...Why? ...I get soooo many cheap laughs out of you goofy Obamasites. ...LMAO!!!!
As we discussed the other day getagrip, not everyone who disagrees with you supports Obama.
Apparently, "LMAO" in boldface is the answer to everything.
Ignore This Author
nah - like with a puppy that shiites in the hall, it's much more useful to rub his nose in it
@Misscreant: ...Nope, just most of 'em.
you found your true calling getagrip, to be an natural irritant, check back in about 4 years when there will be less of you.
The federal judge ruled in favor of the city. Story just posted.
Gee. Logic and the Constitution trumps superstition again.
oh, but it's CALIFORNIA - in Oklahoma or Texass the churches would have won... (sarcasm overwhelming)
Flawed logic, travesty, and a lack of common sense.
...OK folks! ...At the end of the thrird quarter, the score is:
Godless Obamasites: 1
Christmaskeepers: 0
...Please stay tuned as America devolves into an official Third World Nation, complete with supression of religion and noooooooo Christmas!
Sounds like the religious freaks are worried that government won't prop up their cult this year. They must be very insecure in their faith.
they have never been accused of intelligence - just having been brainwashed from birth
getagrip - third quarter, it is more like the game is over. You sound really worried, gee send us your address so we can send you some Lifesavers.
"The federal judge ruled in favor of the city. Story just posted."
Well done.... well done indeed.
Merely your opinion. Reality is quite the opposite!
Gordy: The good of the many outweigh the wants of the few or the one. Festive, nice, friendly display;-- hateful, offensive photos and literature is preferable in your eyes?
bob, it doesn't matter what is "preferable." It matters what the law says.
And just who decides what is "good" for the "many"? Furthermore, we are not a country of majority rule, Bob, and incidents like this are part of the reason why.
"Hateful" and "offensive" are in the eyes of the beholder, Bob -- for example, I find every one of your posts to be both.
That is because you do not see and you do not hear. What matters is the law? Brilliant, except laws change all the time, because sometimes they are unjust or wrong. However common sense is infallible. If the only reason is to offend or degrade that can be interpeted as breaking the law. Defamation of character and causing emotional distress.
Simple thing as comparison of hateful, offensive / to nice. Pet the dog NICE! Kick the dog HATEFUL. can't decide?
How is the law, or how it is being administered, unjust in this case?
Unless Jesus showed up in court, no one can claim defamation of character or emotional distress.
Guess what? You have no right to not be offended.
I didn't say it was unjust. On the other hand I think maybe hundreds of people in theory could claim emotional distress. Case in point: I want to show the horrors of war so I put pictures of mutilated bodies everywhere including at school bus stops. Which I could do, but would it be right to subject 6 year olds to such graphic photos? If I use the logic as in this case, then yes. This is your stance?
People disagree over religion all the time. It does not qualify as emotional distress.
Showing pictures of mutilated bodies to children and having arguements over religion are not the same thing.
Not the same thing? The law is the law. Isn't that what matters or should other factors be considered? Like the display being a part of the cultural heritage of the community for sixty years? It does when you degrade and ridicule. Taunting in some instances can get you arrested for inciting a riot.
So, when some of the "christians" tore down a banner about the Winter Solstice, you would be just fine with them being arrested, and those Pagans suing for emotional distress?
Not when it comes to the law or the Constitution!
When this law changes, then you might have a case. Good luck with that.
Good luck proving that.
Except you're trying to use a false equaivalency.
The separation of church and state should be considered. That's what matters.
Tradition is not a valid excuse to violate the law or the constitution. Just like you say laws change all the time? So too do "traditions."
You do not have the right to not be offended.
Grasping at burning straws still. How sad.
the good of the many outweighing the few is a matter to be applied when people are in need or at jeopardy. Nativity scenes and other displays of Christian joy of Christmas abound so if the majority of Christians absolutely need these displays for their well-being they are available all over the place without having them placed on public lands so that argument of yours is unfounded.
Gordy - while you are correct that there is no right to not be offended you seem to offend that your right to offend (like all other rights) has it's limitations when the manner in which your are offending infringes on the rights of others. A religious display on public lands is more than being offended, it's a violation of the US constitution's establishment clause as placing the display on said public lands is an "establishment of religion"
Agreed.
I witnessed no logic in any response to my query, only avoidance of the common good, and common sense. The statement is you support their right to "hateful, offensive photos and literature is preferable in your eyes?" Literal meanings for everything is a sad way to go through life. It is also illogical. The law is the law? No straws, facts. Answer the question. That you would also be ok with the photos, because it is CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT? I believe none answer because it would counter their position as suspect.
Then you haven't been paying attention.
Point out where i said that! or are you just presuming too much?
Yes! Especially matters of the Constitution! And the courts ruled on the issue!
Still using a strawman argument I see!
No. It has nothing to do with the issue at hand. Try to stay on topic!
And you still have not answered the question: who decides what that "common good" is? The answer is that since we are not a country of majority rule, Bob, what you and/or the majority consider to be the "common good" is irrelevant.
The actual "common good" is to keep the separation of church and state that exists in this country, as it always has.
ErinNJ I believe you and Gordy had provide some nice slam dunks. Nice, but when they are on send you might as well be talking to your sleeping cat. :) Guys have a good Thanksgiving.
Thank you Greg. You are too kind. Happy Thanksgiving to you as well. And to you too Erin. :)
Happy Thanksgiving to my lovely Newsvine friends! Eat too much!
:)
Gordy:
The statement is you support their right to "hateful, offensive photos and literature is preferable in your eyes?"
Point out where i said that! or are you just presuming too much?
I don't pay attention? I wrote that as a question, see the question mark on end? Where is it attributed to you? It was in my post you answered.
Slam dunks? It sounds more like I am dealing with slammed drunks. Drunk on egotistical rants devoid of logic and reason. Display is not in government nor was it started by Federal, State or City worker. Community is what Judge in this instance decided against because of a few antagonists. Know what they are? Probaly not so I'll help; A character in conflict with hero: a major character in a book, play, or movie whose values or behavior are in conflict with those of the protagonist or hero
If you cannot tell the difference from my post and yours then;
The only definition of strawman in context of this discussion is this one.
A straw man or man of straw is a dummy in the shape of a human.
Constitutional Amendments not recgonised in part or all; Amendment 4, 5, 6, 8, and 13 allowing slavery.
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, EXCEPT as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to theirjurisdiction.
Have you championed this cause yet? The literal, and stated meaning is slavery is possible.
I guess you might not have a current copy nor are interested in the laws of your country. Patriot Act trumps US constitution now.