Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Listen folks, this thread seems to have gone in the direction of "Is there a God or isn't there" at which point I believe it would be better placed in the Religion Forum of C-D.
The OP, a poster from the NorthEast, was shocked to see the billboard in question placed at the Lincoln Tunnel - connecting NY and NJ. The easy answer, offensive as he found the ad to be, is under 1st Amendment rights, it can be legally placed there.
That of course leads to "Why do the American Atheists WANT to place it there? The only correct answer, in my opinion, is to create controversary. Mission accomplished. Does it really do anything for their cause? Not really to any of the NY/NJ people who see it. I've seen the comments on this board about the billboards dotting the South calling for hellfire on non-belivers. I find those offensive as well. But the fact remains that NY/NJ is not exactly the "gateway to the South". So this billboard could not be in retaliation, rationally, for any of those hellfire billboards. Why didn't the American Atheists place this billboard in Atlanta, GA or Austin, TX? Cowardly?
I don't see strength in any organization that needs to erect a billboard making a mockery of one religion to gain support for its own. It reeks of childishness.
So to bring the topic back to what the OP intended, I do find the billboard offensive and certainly geographically misplaced.
But atheism is NOT a religion. It is lack of religion. And with this billboard it is spreading the truth unlike the hurtful actually religious billboards.
But atheism is NOT a religion. It is lack of religion. And with this billboard it is spreading the truth unlike the hurtful actually religious billboards.
Where exactly, in the states of NY/NJ, are those hurtful religious billboards?
That of course leads to "Why do the American Atheists WANT to place it there? The only correct answer, in my opinion, is to create controversary.
<snipped for brevity>
I don't see strength in any organization that needs to erect a billboard making a mockery of one religion to gain support for its own. It reeks of childishness.
So to bring the topic back to what the OP intended, I do find the billboard offensive and certainly geographically misplaced.
I see we have yet another poster here who doesn't understand why a billboard like that is not to create controversy, or to be offensive.
I'd suggest a little education. Try reading Stephen Hawking's 'The Grand Design' and you'll see that a deity, ANY deity, is not necessary for the universe to come into existence. But of course, sheeple are afraid of education.
Sorry...I don't buy it. It doesn't answer the ultimate question of how it all started.
Personally, I don't know how it all started. But that is not proof that god exists. It just proves that I don't know how it started.
You have 2 choices: either an intelligent creator or not. If you can disprove one, the other is true by default. That is simple, common logic. since we can prove that it's impossible to get something from nothing, the logical, rational belief is a creator.
Having said that, I'll never accuse atheists of being rational...so I'm sure someone will come back with the dopey answer that there "must be at third alternative".
You have 2 choices: either an intelligent creator or not. If you can disprove one, the other is true by default. That is simple, common logic. since we can prove that it's impossible to get something from nothing, the logical, rational belief is a creator.
Having said that, I'll never accuse atheists of being rational...so I'm sure someone will come back with the dopey answer that there "must be at third alternative".
Your logic is not as sound as you think and your entire premise has a fatal flaw. Who created the creator? If the existence of the universe is evidence of a creator since as you put it - "it's impossible to get something from nothing" then your intelligent creator could not have come from nothing either. So, to stay true to your logic, an intelligent creator (Creator 1.0) must have created Creator 2.0 who in turn created the universe. However, who or what created Creator 1.0? Your logic essentially leads to an endless loop of hypothetical intelligent creators and still provides no answer to the question of how it all began.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
