Christian censorship: Atheist billboard taken down

[Town Heretic]

I fully understand how you might disagree with the specific message being relayed...rather I'm surprised by you marginalizing the spirit of the message itself ....simply because of a differing p.o.v.

You'll have to explain what you mean by that. Marginalizing how?

Per the traditional methods of advertising.... the month of December seems an optimal time/place to carry such a message (for those very reasons you've given prior). Candid perhaps, though hardly offensive.

I wouldn't expect someone from outside of the faith to share my belief that an attempt to use the week before Christmas to generate press for an organization fundamentally opposed to the Christian premise to be in poor taste. But I do and not without reason.

Perhaps, this hits too close to home and thus you've lost perspective.

I'm not outraged. I'm not angry. It's...tacky. I tried to give people who might approach with a bias that skews against seeing the point by suggesting they consider it in relation to someone holding up a sign reading, "Don't believe in marriage? You're not alone" in the midst of a wedding party.

That's why it's in poor taste. It doesn't have to mention Christmas to use it, which is why they sought to have the beginning date coincide with the week before Christmas.

..though I'm surprised as you generally keep your personal "trees" from obscuring the forest (albeit unpopular) in question.

Then given that you might want to at least consider the possibility that I"m not doing it here.

 

[Daedalean's_Sun]

You are not dumb enough to believe that lie, are you?

Or you could look at what the billboard says. :idunno:

 

[Town Heretic]

So set it out for us.

Why? It doesn't impact or reach the point. Do you think people tend to complain when something annoys them on a scale of 1 to 10 at your particular slotting? lain:

But what about "the dominate culture, wedding party, etc, etc"?

How many Robert E. Lee parties were there this year? How many billboards were erected along you interstate with, "Don't believe in celebrating slain civil rights leaders? You're not alone"?

Did the Atheists deliberately come into a world that celebrates Christmas just to screw around with Christians?

Atheists don't come into the world any more than Christians do. But those particular atheists deliberately chose the week before Christmas and it takes a willful sort of naivete to miss the point of that, the foreseeable impact of it and the press waiting to be generated by it. Clever? Certainly and as certainly in poor taste.

 

[Daedalean's_Sun]

Muslims are generally known to be more observant of their holy days than Christians are, and the Muslim holy days rotate throughout the year every 32 years, so Muslim holy days will often occur on or near Christmas, such as Ramadan in 1998-2000. Few Christians would be offended to see a billboard promoting Islam during Christmas.


Jews are generally known to be more observant of their holy days than Christians are, and the Jewish holy days of Chanukkah will always occur in December, sometimes on Christmas. Few Christians would be offended to see a billboard promoting Judaism during Christmas.


Buddhists are generally known to be more observant of their spiritual practices than Christians are, but few Christians really understand what Buddhist practices and beliefs are. Most Christians would just be confused to see a billboard promoting Buddhism during Christmas.

So in summary: Muslims, Jews, and Buddhists it's okay, but not for atheists.

This pretty much confirms my suspicion.

Atheism is the general religious belief that there is no gods, and more specifically the religious belief that the Judeo-Christian God of the Bible does not exist.

eh...not quite. Though I don't expect you to be impartial about what atheists believe.

I state this because Atheists spend much more time arguing against the Judeo-Christian God than against any other god.

In the west perhaps, for demographic reasons. I imagine the story is different for Atheists in other parts of the world.

It is a churlish act anytime during the year, but it is a boorishly churlish act during Christmas.

It is "churlish" because it reminds you that atheists exist.

 

[quip]

You'll have to explain what you mean by that. Marginalizing how?

Perhaps, mis-characterizing would be a more apt term..specifically your term "offensive". I see it quite the opposite. Though strong in message, it seems quite ordinary in its approach. (wholly unlike the red herring ad being bandied about on this thread.)

I wouldn't expect someone from outside of the faith to share my belief that an attempt to use the week before Christmas to generate press for an organization fundamentally opposed to the Christian premise to be in poor taste. But I do and not without reason.

As noted earlier...no better the time!

As such, tastes seem to vary as much as the respective opinions which accompany them...and you know what they say about opinions....lain:

I'm not outraged. I'm not angry. It's...tacky. I tried to give people who might approach with a bias that skews against seeing the point by suggesting they consider it in relation to someone holding up a sign reading, "Don't believe in marriage? You're not alone" in the midst of a wedding party.

A secure belief in marriage..quite the apt remedy for such ailments.

That's why it's in poor taste. It doesn't have to mention Christmas to use it, which is why they sought to have the beginning date coincide with the week before Christmas.

Supra. (Not a big fan of egg nog myself.)

Then given that you might want to at least consider the possibility that I"m not doing it here.

Evidence notwithstanding?

 

[Daedalean's_Sun]

Contextually, fundamentally.

What context? Be specific.

?

 

[Town Heretic]

Perhaps, mis-characterizing would be a more apt term..specifically your term "offensive". I see it quite the opposite. Though strong in message, it seems quite benign in its approach.

I've had so many conversations that you'll forgive me if I ask you to remind me where I used that one. I've mostly said it's in poor taste. I'm sure it will be offensive to many Christians, but I don't recall using it outside of that possibility.

EDIT: I didn't use the term. I used offending party, which indicates the acting party, the one initiating the conflict, in this case by attempting to capitalize on the week of Christmas.

As noted earlier...no better the time!

As countered earlier, the worst of timing. Plans set, most people in motion and the season and celebrations having long started in one form or another. November would give those reaching out to poor, isolated atheists apparently incapable of considering finding likened minds else.

As such, tastes seem to vary as much as the respective opinions which accompany them...and you know what they say about opinions....lain:

Yep. We're all entitled to them.

A secure belief in marriage..quite the apt remedy for such ailments.

The parallel in terms of being inappropriately timed is apt and that's the extent of the use.

Evidence notwithstanding?

What evidence? A rational explanation as to why I find the action tasteless isn't something else because it fails to move you from your own valuations and bias, quip.

 

[Daedalean's_Sun]

It is anti Christian in context.

Atheism is in disagreement with Christianity, sure, but so is every non-Christian Religion. This remains the case 365 days a year.

 

[oatmeal]

Atheist Billboard in Alabama Gets Taken Down Two Weeks Early Following Complaints from Local Residents


Free speech!! Censorship!! Soon it'll be illegal to be an atheist!!! Aaaaaahhhhhhh!

:chuckle:

In God we trust!

 

[fool]

No, but not leaving up an additional 2 weeks is what the op was whining about without checking all the facts.

We're not talking about the OP anymore, haven't been for some while.
We're talking about why Town finds it tasteless that Atheists would have a billboard in December.

 

[Town Heretic]

Originally Posted by Town Heretic
It is anti Christian in context.

Atheism is in disagreement with Christianity, sure, but so is every non-Christian Religion. This remains the case 365 days a year.

And when one of those trades on Christmas in a way that is antithetical to the Christian celebration that will mean something.

 

[genuineoriginal]

What a bizarre thing for you to say. The fact that you can't answer a question doesn't make me an atheist.

Your saying something an atheist would say makes you sound like an atheist.

That has nothing to do with me refusing to answer an atheistic question from someone who claims to be a Christian.

You do like to quote selectively, don't you?

You are the one asking whether Christians are going to be "so filled with rage they couldn't see where they were going and swerved off the road, leaving the area around the billboard littered with car wrecks".

That is not a very Christian question to ask.

 

[Angel4Truth]

We're not talking about the OP anymore, haven't been for some while.
We're talking about why Town finds it tasteless that Atheists would have a billboard in December.

I don't read an entire thread thats this long before responding usually, do you?

I still see the need to update the ops concern, if thats ok with you?

 

[Town Heretic]

We're not talking about the OP anymore, haven't been for some while.
We're talking about why Town finds it tasteless that Atheists would have a billboard in December.

No, we're talking about why it's in poor taste for atheists to launch a contrary message in a billboard the week of Christmas. A bit different.

 

[genuineoriginal]

You are not dumb enough to believe that lie, are you?

Don't under estimate me.

I would never do that.

Spoiler

 

[genuineoriginal]

Or you could look at what the billboard says. :idunno:

Yes, the billboard says what it says.

Spoiler

 

[annabenedetti]

Your saying something an atheist would say makes you sound like an atheist.

That has nothing to do with me refusing to answer an atheistic question from someone who claims to be a Christian.

It shows how much you like to dissemble.

You are the one asking whether Christians are going to be "so filled with rage they couldn't see where they were going and swerved off the road, leaving the area around the billboard littered with car wrecks".

That is not a very Christian question to ask.

It's a very Christian thing to ask. It should prompt some Christian introspection. Your automatic answer (to what was obviously intentional hyperbole) should have been "of course not," but for some reason you weren't able to do that. Maybe some Christians would be that filled with rage. Something to think about, for sure.

Christians should be able to pass that billboard without the overreaction I'm seeing from you.

 

[genuineoriginal]

So in summary: Muslims, Jews, and Buddhists it's okay, but not for atheists.

This pretty much confirms my suspicion.

You are welcome.
Freedom of religious expression is in the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.

I don't expect you to be impartial about what atheists believe.

No, I have no reason to be impartial about what atheists believe, since people distrust atheists for good reason.

It is "churlish" because it reminds you that atheists exist.

It is churlish because it is similar to yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre to see if you can provoke a reaction.

 

[quip]

I've had so many conversations that you'll forgive me if I ask you to remind me where I used that one. I've mostly said it's in poor taste. I'm sure it will be offensive to many Christians, but I don't recall using it outside of that possibility.

EDIT: I didn't use the term. I used offending party, which indicates the acting party, the one initiating the conflict, in this case by attempting to capitalize on the week of Christmas.

Fair enough. Though it was implied...and the terms explicitly used are certainly not complimentary.

As countered earlier, the worst of timing. Plans set, most people in motion and the season and celebrations having long started in one form or another. November would give those reaching out to poor, isolated atheists apparently incapable of considering finding likened minds else.

More to the point...a November ad would save you unwanted consternation...or would it?

Yep. We're all entitled to them.

Though some bask within the tyrannical realm of the majority. Though I'm digressing.

The parallel in terms of being inappropriately timed is apt and that's the extent of the use.

Mere speculation...short-sighted I might add. Don't project a lack of value to that which you personally refuse to find any.

What evidence? A rational explanation as to why I find the action tasteless isn't something else because it fails to move you from your own valuations and bias, quip.

This rationale would be plausible if your assessment was more than merely a matter of personal taste.

 

[annabenedetti]

It is churlish because it is similar to yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre to see if you can provoke a reaction.

:chuckle: I'm beginning to see why "swerving drivers" struck a nerve with you.