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.
Cry me a river (post #2 sums up OP's attitude perfectly). It's perfectly OK for churches to advertise fundraising efforts and all their other programs, preach on TV and everywhere else, bang on my door frequently trying to get me to join their cult, erect huge crosses alongside highways and on many streets, print "In God We Trust" on dollar bills, and mandate public school students recite "One Nation, Under God" every morning during the Pledge of Allegiance, among other things. But when the American Atheists or FFRF puts up the occasional billboard, the Christians get their panties in a wad. Oh, the hypocrisy
The difference is Christian advertising usually isn't meant to antagonize or offend people. The billboard was carefully designed to be a slap in the face to Christians who celebrate the birth of Christ almost on the level of mockery. They wanted it to offend Christians.
Re-read this post and see if you can come up with the problem and the lie in it. Try for once to be honest and look real hard. It is there for all to see.
The only problem is your inability to understand....just as you have failed to understand SandraMoore.
Pantheism is a Theist posture, thus not a Atheist ideology...but is not a Religion.
So, again, I am neither.
The difference is Christian advertising usually isn't meant to antagonize or offend people. The billboard was carefully designed to be a slap in the face to Christians who celebrate the birth of Christ almost on the level of mockery. They wanted it to offend Christians.
Christian signs saying things like, "Believe or burn", or some other nonsense isn't meant to antagonize? Puhlease. Half the Christian signs I see are some form of that garbage, and that is much worse than simply saying, "You don't have to go to church to be a good person".
The only problem is your inability to understand....just as you have failed to understand SandraMoore.
Pantheism is a Theist posture, thus not a Atheist ideology...but is not a Religion.
So, again, I am neither.
Well, Goldie, that isn't entirely true...
Do you remember arguing that one should use the "expert definers" to determine what words mean? And asserting that if you want to argue a negative that it cannot be true for any of the definitions given, not just one?
Surely you remember this, but just say the word and we can rehash that discussion...
religion noun re·li·gion \ri-ˈli-jən\
: the belief in a god or in a group of gods
: an organized system of beliefs, ceremonies, and rules used to worship a god or a group of gods
: an interest, a belief, or an activity that is very important to a person or group
I have added the bold for emphasis. This means that using the "full and complete definition" of the word, you are religious, as you follow a religion, which you term as your "Theist posture".
Now if you only want to use the second definition, then you would be correct that you are not religious. However since you insist that others must use the "full and complete definition" of God, surely you would not be such a rank hypocrite as to pick and choose your definition of "religion"?
Right?
So, religious you indeed are. And A fundie too, since you spend so much energy on message boards trying to enlighten the lost, i mean "Hip" people to the "reality of God". Thats what fundies do, right?
The only problem is your inability to understand....just as you have failed to understand SandraMoore.
Pantheism is a Theist posture, thus not a Atheist ideology...but is not a Religion.
So, again, I am neither.
And yet you and yours insist that atheism is actually a religion. Not taking a theist position? Have you even read your posts?
Call yourself whatever you like but you display religious tendancies and beliefs.
Christian signs saying things like, "Believe or burn", or some other nonsense isn't meant to antagonize? Puhlease. Half the Christian signs I see are some form of that garbage, and that is much worse than simply saying, "You don't have to go to church to be a good person".
Perhaps simply saying that you are not a Christian is offensive, but saying that non Christians are traitors or wicked or evil is just trying to help these people find the one and only correct way to think?
If one has to go to Church on Christmas to be good then a lot of people including many Christians are not going to be good this Christmas. If the atheist's billboard is offensive then those inferring that you do have to go to church to be good at Christmas are also offensive, more so in fact IMHO.
If a person with tunnel vision only listened to atheists, they would believe that Christians are pretty much the scum of society. They are bullies cramming their beliefs down the throats of non-believers, demanding that they conform and change all the laws to be stamped approved by evangelical Christians.
Atheists just want to be left alone! Live in peace, work and raise their families without Christianity constantly trying to butt into their lives, right? If that is the case, why do we have this:
Isn't this loud big billboard doing the exact thing they are complaining about? It is a big whopping advertisement for secularism promoting the value of skipping church. The atheists knew full well that such a message on Christmas would offend a lot of people, but that is obviously the intent.
and you are surprised that anyone intentionally offends anyone else because?
Honestly, if Atheist truly wanted to be left alone they would not talk about God so much and would not continue to draw attention to themselves purposely.
I do thank each and every atheist who Glorifies God everytime they speak/write/think about God.
Do you remember arguing that one should use the "expert definers" to determine what words mean? And asserting that if you want to argue a negative that it cannot be true for any of the definitions given, not just one?
Surely you remember this, but just say the word and we can rehash that discussion...
religion noun re·li·gion \ri-ˈli-jən\
: the belief in a god or in a group of gods
: an organized system of beliefs, ceremonies, and rules used to worship a god or a group of gods
: an interest, a belief, or an activity that is very important to a person or group
I have added the bold for emphasis. This means that using the "full and complete definition" of the word, you are religious, as you follow a religion, which you term as your "Theist posture".
Now if you only want to use the second definition, then you would be correct that you are not religious. However since you insist that others must use the "full and complete definition" of God, surely you would not be such a rank hypocrite as to pick and choose your definition of "religion"?
Right?
So, religious you indeed are. And A fundie too, since you spend so much energy on message boards trying to enlighten the lost, i mean "Hip" people to the "reality of God". Thats what fundies do, right?
-NoCapo
You are incorrect, in that thread he only insisted that when the full definition supported him then one must use the full definition but when it did not support him that it was wrong to use the full one and should only use the one that you had to Google with a specific word order and use the single definition from that search. That is when dishonesty = onto the ignore list kicked in.
I'm not considering the subforums. I'm sure they are all dominated by their respective group.
It sure seems this general board splits more heavily toward Atheists (since I've been here anyway)...especially the thread originations. Cupper, Freak, and other nonbelievers are currently some of the main providers. Both old and new nonbelievers like Arequipa and Shirina rack up post count like crazy. And if you consider the amount of content in the posts it gets even more skewed.
Not counting the few Bible Literalists, the heaviest Believer offerings are from non-religious like Mystic, Trout, and others.
Your statistical analysis may be correct...but I doubt it. And if it is...the difference is not significant, especially considering the demographic of the country this board originates in...foreign posters notwithstanding.
So you admit the possibility that you are wrong, yet try to spin it to anyone who disagrees with you that is wrong. Just keep believing your false narrative if that makes you happy. Thoughtful people can see through you and your claims.
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.
