Hello wingers of all persuasions:

Well, you Christians wanted YOUR stuff displayed in public, and so it was... That should make you Christians happy. YOUR message IS in the public square... Nobody is trying to REMOVE your nativity scene, like they used to... Nope, you guys WON that battle..

But, hold on a minute podner... That danged governor of ours said that if the public arena is open for religious display, then it should be open to ALL religious displays...

No?? Just yours? Cause we're a Christian nation??

In any case, we're NOT a Christian nation. So, some atheist group put a sign alongside the nativity scene in the public square. It says “There is only one natural world. Religion is but myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds.”

So, what's wrong with that?

excon

Here is the text :
”At this season of the winter solstice, may reason prevail. There are no gods, no devils, no angels, no heaven or hell. There is only our natural world. Religion is but myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds.”

What does it say positive about atheism ? Nothing . All it does is attack other's faith . Maybe you should edit the posting to say it is some anti-theist group.

Christmas was declared a United States Federal holiday in 1870 by an act of Congress .

Quote:

---

Before the 19th century, many Americans worked on Christmas, but in the industrial era the holiday began also to honor universal values, such as home, children and family life, and to incorporate secular customs like exchanging gifts and cards, and the decoration and display of evergreen "Christmas Trees." Congress proclaimed Christmas a federal holiday in 1870. In 1999, a federal court acknowledged these secular aspects in rejecting a claim that the holiday impermissibly endorsed and furthered a particular religious belief.

---

An Overview of U.S. Holidays

By that reasoning it is perfectly acceptable to have Christmas celebrated in the public square.

Hello tom:

Thanks for the complete text.

It DOESN'T say anything positive about atheism, because there is no atheism to BE positive about. Atheism isn't something - it's a LACK of something.

Notwithstanding the courts ruling, Christmas IS a religious holiday. It just is. You can pretend it isn't.. But, if it quacks like a duck and all that stuff...

But, I don't have any problem with Christmas being celebrated in the public square, as long as the public square is open to anybody who wants celebrate something. That's what this ruling is all about - INCLUSIVENESS!! You just don't happen to like what was included.

Why is the atheist message less important than the Christmas message?

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Christmas IS a religious holiday. It just is. You can pretend it isn't..

---

Uh, Christmas is Santa Claus, and elves, and presents! What cave have you been in??

I see the atheist's,as you said,as a non messenger,but an entity against the religion which they are taking a stand against.

I really do see both sides to this.

Tradition verses (my personal beliefs)

To change is to accept the fact that we might be growing as a nation.

When was the last time you saw that kind of change?

I don't get the obsession with something you don't believe in .
It is like a vegan shaping their tofu into the shape of a burger . They even creatively use spices to make them taste like burgers.

Why do you need a symbol or to make a "sign"for a non-belief?. Not to proclaim your non-belief but to attack someone else's. That sign is a negative attack commentary ;that's all it is .It's as if we were putting up a Christmas tree that had a sign on it "all you atheists are condemned to hell"

Tell you what ; remove the word "religion " from the last sentence and replace it with the word 'Islam' and what you would have is a "hate-crime " .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

I don't get the obsession with something you don't believe in .

---

I don't get this obsession with something you believe in. Can't you keep it personal? An atheist's lifestyle can be celebrated just as much as a christian, don't you agree?

Why do you need a symbol or to make a "sign"for a non-belief?. Not to proclaim your non-belief but to attack someone else's.

And just how did the other religions start their campaign of their beliefs?

Were they not shunned and in fact killed,because they were against the populace?

“I once wanted to be an atheist but I gave it up. They have no holidays!”
Henny Youngman

Quote:

---

An atheist's lifestyle can be celebrated just as much as a christian, don't you agree?

---

Sure .they already have a day... May 1. :)



The problem here is that this is not a celebration of atheism . It is raw attack on religion. It is not even an equal response to a nativity scene because as I said ;all it is is a commentary against the belief of those who celebrate the nativity .

I agree it is an attack. The wording is all wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

I don't get the obsession with something you don't believe in .

---

Hello again, tom:

Couple things...

If you thought your president believed in four leafed clovers... Nahhh, let me rephrase that... If you thought your president based his LIFE on four leafed clovers... Nahhh, let me rephrase that again. If you thought your president, not only believed deeply in four leafed clovers, and based his life on them, but was going to indoctrinate YOU and YOUR CHILDREN with public displays of four leafed clovers, plus he has every intention of teaching a devotion to four leafed clovers in YOUR schools, then I bet you'd have an obsession with something you don't believe in.

That's kind of how I feel.

Now, if the four leafed clover fanatics wanted to believe in four leafed clovers amongst themselves, and didn't try to foist a belief in four leaved clovers upon the rest of us, I'll bet you'd be right there cheering us along. No?

excon

The fact that the President celebrated 4 leaf clovers publicly would not imply he was trying to establish the belief of 4 leaf clovers as the religion of the state. The establishment clause is a 2 headed coin.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

The government cannot either establish a religion or oppose it.

Ex, it was an attack plain and simple. Why should the state of Washington allow one group to attack another on public land?

When I was in 7th grade I was in catholic school and I kidnapped Baby Jesus from the nativity scene and left a ransom note. I asked for 30 cartons of chocolate milk by December 20th if they ever wanted to see baby Jesus again. I didn't get my milks but I did get detention for the rest of the school year. I learned then do you dirt by yourself. Snitches!

Hello spit:

Funny!

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

“I once wanted to be an atheist but I gave it up. They have no holidays!”
Henny Youngman


sure .they already have a day .....May 1. :)



The problem here is that this is not a celebration of atheism . It is raw attack on religion. It is not even an equal response to a nativity scene because as I said ;all it is is a commentary against the belief of those who celebrate the nativity .

---

Excuse me... May 1 is Beltane, a pagan holiday celebrated worldwide.

Pagans are NOT atheists. Choose one of your OWN holidays to negate if you're going to negate one.

Actually I was talking about the godless communist celebration .Don't blame me if they coopted the pagan holiday .

Btw .why are you not as offended with their reference to the solstice . Isn't that also a coopting of a pagan celebration ?

Nah, the Christians and other faiths swiped the Solstice ages ago, and we're pretty used to them using our symbols and festivities (look up Saturnalia sometime) that time of year.

And frankly, while I think their wording was VERY poorly phrased, the sign had JUST as much right to be there as the Nativity. Each are just as offensive to either side, really, and if you're going to allow the public acknowledgment of ONE religion, you may as well recognize any and all others that show up--including atheism (lack of religion), Satanism (the belief that Lucifer was maligned and that only God's side of the story got told--victors writing history and all that jazz), Kwanzaa, Hannukah, the Pagan solstice, whatever. I feel the same way about prayer in school as I do about cities having holiday displays--I don't care if you do it, as long as you allow EVERYONE to put up their own stuff for it.

As far as it being a hate crime--it's not, really. A hate crime would have specified Christianity, since it was next to a Christian display. Instead it spoke of religion in general, and used "gods" (plural) and other symbols that are common in MANY religions. Granted, it didn't hit ALL religions (except with the use of gods), but it hit on a lot of them, rather than specifying any ONE religion.

If being anti-religion is a hate crime, I guess being "pro-religion" would have to be also, since it specifically targets those who have no religion (atheists and agnostics)

And now the sign is in the hands of the local cops,turned in by anonymous... hmmm,but not before the churches posted their own rebuttal.

This might become interesting.

Atheists never tire of hitting an empty sack do they?
I mean, after all, according to THEM God doesn't even exist, so what they are doing is attacking a nothing.
Seems like an exercise in futility to me.

Nope.

See, that's what people who focus on the wrong thing don't see there.

They're not attacking a god they don't believe in. They're attacking the fact that established religion has a greater say in EVERYTHING in this country---and it shouldn't. It's not attacking "god", who may or may not exist (I have my views, other people have theirs--I'm not debating the existence of any gods with you); they're attacking RELIGION. Big difference there.

Betcha the people that can't see the difference are the ones that thought the kids destroyed god at the end of the Phillip Pullman books (His Dark Materials), rather than killing the head of the church, which is really rather closer to what it was.

Anyway--if it's tilting at windmills to announce your beliefs, let's just get rid of the "god" in the Pledge of Allegiance, and on our money, and in our courtrooms. I mean, if God exists with or without that stuff, what difference does it make if you have it there or not? If you believe it, it doesn't matter if it's there or not, right?

To use your words---if it's "beating an empty sack" to be atheist and to state your beliefs, I guess that's what they have left after they dump out the beliefs from the sack that other religions--primarily the Christian religions (and I say that ONLY because I've never had any OTHER religion ask me to convert, whether I've found Jesus, told me arbitrarily that I'm going to hell, knocked on my door and asked to share their beliefs with me, handed me pamphlets, etc etc etc)--have shoved into their hands repeatedly. Maybe they're tired of holding a sack holding the imaginary friend of someone else. Maybe they're just trying to get the last of the dirt out of the sack so that they can use it for something other than belief?

Whatever it is, they have JUST AS MUCH RIGHT to their beliefs (or lack thereof) as your or I have to our beliefs. If one religious group (and I term atheists as a religion ONLY because it fits into the religious freedoms thing--I understand that it's a lack of belief in a higher being, rather than a belief "in" something) can put their beliefs/opinions/symbols on the public green, then every OTHER religion can put their beliefs/opinions/symbols on the public green too.

They weren't stopping anyone from practicing their beliefs. They were just putting an alternate point of view out there.

I wonder if a sign saying "Jesus is Lord" or "Jesus is God" (I've seen the former and I think I've seen the later) is not equally attacking atheist beliefs in the same manner as an atheist sign saying "There is no God".

Aren't the Christian's promoting that there is a God in Jesus; why can't the athiests have equal freedom to say there is no God? And how does saying "there is no God" any more of an attack on a religion that it is to say "there is a God" which would attack the core values of those who don't believe in God?

Okay, finally found the original news story (stories). Shame on you Ex for not giving me a damned link! Couldn't look earlier because I was at work, and linking the wording to the sign got me about 20938723049687 hits. Too many bloggers talking about it!

Anyway--the deal is this: Both displays were given permits by the government, applied for WELL ahead of time. This wasn't a random atheist response put up on the spot by someone ticked off by a tree--it was planned, by a group that's been around for some years, and has placed another sign with the same words on it in the Wisconsin capitol building for many years. This year, they decided to add it to Washington's state capitol building as well. So what?

What's hilarious about this is that it started with a public display of a menorrah. Then someone wanted to put in a nativity scene, asked for it too close to Christmas, sued (instead of just realizing it was a TIMING issue, not a discrimination issue), and got to put it up this year. Since the nativity scene lawsuit was publicized, the FFRF decided to apply for THEIR permit as well, and it was granted.

Basically, ANY religious group (or any group with a belief system) can put up their religious symbol in the capitol, as long as they apply for a permit in advance. So--I could apply now for next year's display and be able to put up a Saturnalia display next year if I want to. Or whatever.

Like the group says---freedom OF religion is also freedom FROM religion. Stating "Jesus is Lord" on a billboard is EXACTLY the same offense level as this sign.

BOTH displays in the capitol were privately funded, and are taken up and put down by private parties, as is the Christmas tree that is there every year as well.

Yes they applied for and were granted a permit and that is the issue. I don't have an issue with atheists wanting in on the action, I have issues with the state of Washington approving such an attack.

The group said the purpose of their sign was “not to coerce but just to have a place at the table,” and yet their display is not about having a place at the table, it's an attack plain and simple. Where is the attack in displaying a Menorah? Where is the attack in displaying a nativity scene? How on earth can anyone justify their display on state property, especially next to such innocuous displays? Where was the civility, where was the decorum? Should the state allow Christians to put up a sign next to theirs saying "Repent and believe in Jesus or spend eternity in hell?" How would that go over?

Hello again:

I don't know. You guys talk about civility and decorum. You talk about attacks. How come you don't talk about the law?? Cause, maybe you don't like it. You want YOUR stuff displayed, but nobody else's. That ain't very Christianlike... But, I'm used to you Christians NOT being Christianlike.

You know, THIS is the very reason why our founders separated the church from the state. The bottom line, is there should be NO religious displays in the public square. Cause if you get the one you want, you're also going to get the one you DON'T want.

excon

And there again that's a myth, the founders did NOT eliminate God from government. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion," and the rest of the power is delegated to the states. It is a right of the people, giving constitutional immunity from federal dictation in matters of religion.

You say it "ain't very Christianlike," but I'm not saying they can't have a display, that's up to the state to decide. The state of Washington obviously thinks it's lawful for atheists to attack everyone who believes in God -Christian or not - on state property. Christians and Jews just wanted to display symbols of their beliefs, I'll allow for atheists to do the same. Is that what they did? I suppose so if hatred is a symbol of their beliefs, or is that not really "atheistlike" behavior?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

I'll allow for atheists to do the same. Is that what they did? I suppose so if hatred is a symbol of their beliefs, or is that not really "atheistlike" behavior?

---

Hello again, Steve:

”At this season of the winter solstice, may reason prevail. There are no gods, no devils, no angels, no heaven or hell. There is only our natural world. Religion is but myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds.”

I agree with the sign - absolutely and unequivocally. But, I don't hate anybody, especially YOU, or any of my other Christian friends. In fact, I don't see ANY hate in the sign - NONE!

And, that's the crux of the situation... You guys call disagreement with your viewpoint, hatred... I hate that you do that.

excon

First off---that EXACT wording has been used in the state of Wisconsin's capitol building for years. I guess maybe Wisconsin is more tolerant of unbelief than the state of Washington. I don't know.

Second--the menorrah that someone mentioned is going up on 12/21--yet another representation of yet another religion.

Thirdly--that sign is EXACTLY what atheists believe, just as a nativity scene is EXACTLY what Christians believe.

If somehow, somewhere, insanity prevails and the sign is banned---I'm starting lawsuits against EVERY SINGLE privately paid for and put up billboard that I see that states that "Jesus is Lord" or that "God loves all the babies, even those not born"---because that's offensive to me, as a non-Christian. And frankly--for a group of people that want to keep such things as "In God We Trust" on our money, and "under God" in our pledge of allegiance, people are showing a remarkable lack of tolerance for a SIGN. How do you think those who do not believe in god feel about the money and the pledge? Can you understand NOW how offensive that is?

I retract what I said above about the wording of the sign. It doesn't need to be altered in the least. It's perfect the way it is---because it states EXACTLY what atheists believe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, Steve:

”At this season of the winter solstice, may reason prevail. There are no gods, no devils, no angels, no heaven or hell. There is only our natural world. Religion is but myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds.”

I agree with the sign - absolutely and unequivocally. But, I don't hate anybody, especially YOU, or any of my other Christian friends. In fact, I don't see ANY hate in the sign - NONE!

And, that's the crux of the situation... You guys call disagreement with your viewpoint, hatred... I hate that you do that.

---

LOL, that's rich, ex. If I say "Jesus loves you" someone on these boards would scream about my hatred. In fact I don't have to do anything to be accused of hatred, all I have to do is be a conservative, or a Christian, or a Republican, or mention a name like Limbaugh or Malkin in passing and I'm automatically considered a purveyor of hate by some on these boards.

And yet, atheists put up a display next to harmless symbols that emphatically says everything we believe is a myth and then claims it "hardens hearts and enslaves minds" is not an attack? It isn't hatred to declare on public land that we're deluded, hard hearted, unreasonable, superstitious fools whose minds are enslaved and are out to enslave others is not hatred? That's bullsh*t, ex, and you know it.

Claiming that I call disagreement with my viewpoint hatred is also bullsh*t, it goes against all the evidence where I've agreed to disagree, where I've outright stated I don't expect people to be like me or believe like me, that it would be an awfully dull world if we were all the same.

I've conceded that they have rights here, I don't expect them to believe like me or keep silent. But I don't care if it's exactly what atheists believe or not, I don't care if they have the right to put up their display or not, I don't care that they have the freedom to say what they want - it doesn't make it the right thing to do. Where you're more concerned with their rights I'm more concerned with doing the right thing. I guarantee if Christians had put up a sign criticizing atheism in a similar manner heads would roll. But then I doubt the governor would have approved such a sign in the first place and would probably have issued a statement that the state would not be a party to such bigotry and intolerance.

By the way, everyone who is offended by "In God we trust" on their money can send theirs to me.

Missing atheist sign found in Washington state - CNN.com

According to this article the sign was stolen. It was recovered, and now has an addition - "Thou Shalt Not Steal".

Here's what to Gov. said:

"I happen to be a Christian, and I don't agree with the display that is up there," Washington Gov. Christine Gregoire told The Olympian newspaper. "But that doesn't mean that as governor, I have the right to deny their ability to express their free speech."

That is what this is about. Free speech.

And to all of you who say a nativity scene is innocuous, here's how the FFR feels:

"When people ask us, 'Why are you hateful? Why are you putting up something critical of people's holidays? -- we respond that we kind of feel that the Christian message is the hate message," he said. "On that Nativity scene, there is this threat of internal violence if we don't submit to that master. Hate speech goes both ways."

You may not agree, but this organization feels the nativity scene is an attack. So there is another question that must be asked now - how come Christians can attack non-Christians in their display? How come the state approved such a message of hate?

See? It goes both ways.

Just found this too:

The Rev. Ken Hutcherson of Redmond's Antioch Bible Church put up his own sign at the Capitol on Friday that says, in part: "There is one God. ... Atheism is but myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds."

If the atheist's sign was an attack, why attack back? Why not turn the other cheek? Instead, Christians have resorted to theft, destruction of property, and an equal attack by changing one word. The sign just gets more and more accurate, doesn't it?

Local News | Capitol holiday-display controversy turning into "circus" | Seattle Times Newspaper

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jillianleab

Just found this too:

The Rev. Ken Hutcherson of Redmond's Antioch Bible Church put up his own sign at the Capitol on Friday that says, in part: "There is one God. ... Atheism is but myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds."

If the atheist's sign was an attack, why attack back? Why not turn the other cheek? Instead, Christians have resorted to theft, destruction of property, and an equal attack by changing one word. The sign just gets more and more accurate, doesn't it?

Local News | Capitol holiday-display controversy turning into "circus" | Seattle Times Newspaper

---

I also watched this Rev. on the news stating the exact signage.I totally agree with jillianleab in this.

The need of this representative to defend his position about his purist beliefs and then to attack the atheists in this way... well... shows the message all too clear.(by the way,I purposely didn't say the churches views,this is just a single individual doing this,but he represents the religion he is defending)

I wonder if the higher authorities are ever going to join the little people,in the church that is,in this statement.

This began with? A man a few years ago fighting the system because his child was made to say the pledge of allegiance?(at least that is when I became of this argument in the public forum.)

Been a long time coming,what with this type of information has been on the money and capital buildings for more than 200 years.

KBC

Say Ex, if you don't like Christmas, then go to work on that day and treat it like any other day. I don't have Xmas decorations anymore. I don't even put up a tree anymore. It's been years and years since I've had a tree. And yes, I did have to work on Christmas several years in a row. I don't go overboard buying presents anymore like I used to. Somehow it's okay for other people to celebrate whatever they want, whenever they want. I just don't have to participate if I don't want to. And no, I am not an atheist either. Christmas is for kids and Santa Clause and gifts. The real Christmas is in your heart and deeds done to your fellow man. I don't care who puts up what religious display in the town square. It's their money and if they choose to do this, so be it whether it is Christian, pagan, Kwanza, Jewish menorah, nativity, or a sign that says There is No God. People nowadays are getting nuts over this religious display stuff. Can't they find something else to spend their energy on instead of arguing about a religious display? Guess not. We've become a nation of litigious people.

Hello twink:

It's OK. I'll look out for YOUR First Amendment rights for you. Somebody's got to do it.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello twink:

It's ok. I'll look out for YOUR First Amendment rights for you. Somebody's got to do it.

excon

---

Thank you dear Ex. Please look out for my First Amendment rights for me. I'm too busy to do this all by my lonesome and you're such a big, strong, silent (?) type that is quite cabable of doing this for me. Sigh!

Actually I'm busy taking down my Halloween decorations I didn't put up.

“At this season of the Winter Solstice may reason prevail. There are no gods, no devils, no angels, no heaven or hell. There is only our natural world. Religion is but myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds.“

The way I see it, everyone should have their rights... of course. But I don't think my heart is hardened for believing in God, nor do I think anyone's is hardened for not believing in God. I think that part was a little shocking.
In ways of course religion enslaves your mind, just like anything you believe in, it becomes a part of you and you go with it. Just like someone would go on without religion their mind is enslaved to NOT believe in the same thing as others.
I think this time is a beautiful time of the year, it brings more charity, volunteers, it brings us all together, to me that isn't so heart hardening, is it?
We should all just come together and if you want to BECAUSE IT IS YOUR RIGHT, you get to choose not to read it;) (you can thank me later ex;))

Synn, you are exceptional when it comes to this subject! I have to add that in because you are wonderful at explaining it best. I do think the sign could have left the harden of hearts part out. Other than that, I think we all should have the same rights and that goes for the rights not to read it or watch it.;)

Well said Start... 22

Stringer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

Here is the text :
”At this season of the winter solstice, may reason prevail. There are no gods, no devils, no angels, no heaven or hell. There is only our natural world. Religion is but myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds.”

What does it say positive about atheism ? nothing . all it does is attack other's faith . maybe you should edit the posting to say it is some anti-theist group.

Christmas was declared a United States Federal holiday in 1870 by an act of Congress .


An Overview of U.S. Holidays

By that reasoning it is perfectly acceptable to have Christmas celebrated in the public square.

---

1] why don't the atheists try to pull that crap in Iran or Pakistan or Indonesia or Saudi Arabia and lets see what kind of reception they get.

2] " Nobody talks so constantly about God as those who insist that there is no God. "
- Heywood Broun





g&p

The funny thing about this entire thing to me is that the Christians that are so offended are acting very UN-Christian.

Stealing the sign. Protesting instead of turning the other cheek. Getting all uptight about the entire thing instead of just acknowledging that their faith is (or SHOULD be) above it. Pastors seeing hate where there IS no hate--just no belief. Lack of belief in someone's god doesn't mean you hate them--it just means they believe in something you don't.

A woman I work with is truly one of the best Christians I have ever met in my life. She LIVES her faith. She forgives those who offend her, and tries to help them anyway. She gives of herself--she's a recovering alcoholic, sober for several years, who sponsors others in the Alcoholics Anonymous program. She goes to church every week, not just on the "big" days, says a daily meditation, and prays all the time---and all of this WITHOUT shoving it in the face of those around her. She just IS a good Christian--she doesn't PREACH being a good Christian.

It seems to me that those Christians that can be THAT offended by a sign that offers a different belief than theirs are the ones whose faith is shaken too easily---and the ones too busy pointing out the motes in the eyes of others.

If Christianity REALLY wants to get its faith out there to others, and have things go back to the "good ol' days" when they controlled basically everything in this country, from school pageants to downtown displays to whatever--the best way to convert people is to BE a good Christian instead of PREACHING Christianity.

Honestly---the best way to handle this entire situation so that it wasn't blown so far out of proportion that people are up in arms about the entire thing---and believe me, if it's not dropped, what it will lead to is NO religious displays on ANY public property, period--is that someone should have put up a sign by the nativity that said "The birth of Jesus is God's way of saying that he believes in you, even if you don't believe in Him, and that he forgives you your sins even though you do not deserve forgiveness".

That's a better retaliation, don't you think, than stealing the sign and pointing fingers and screaming "hate!!"? Wouldn't that be a more Christian and forgiving thing to do?

Maybe I'm just expecting too much.