Atheist Billboards put up for the holidays

[Skeptic Ginger]

Take that Christians!! It belongs to consumers now!

Did I ever tell you I have a copy of the album in your avatar?

 

[UnrepentantSinner]

I was listening to Mike Gallagher this morning and he was cheering the performance of Bill The Human Foghorn Donohugh "debating" a guy from the American Humanist Association.

I almost drove my car off the road I was so enraged by the B.S. Donohugh was spewing.
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=hLJ0Vo8pVio

Just found the original on Fox.com with a transcript - oddly enough, Donohugh doesn't seem any more coherent in written form.
http://www.foxnews.com/video-search/m/21416450/war_on_christmas.htm
Does anyone know if Fox allows comments on these stories and how we might find them if they do?

 

[applecorped]

Did I ever tell you I have a copy of the album in your avatar?

Did I ever tell you how much I enjoy your incredibly spot on, incisive, witty, reasoned, articulate and thoroughly entertaining posts? You really are my favorite person here! We really should get together sometime (soon, very soon)! Just send me your address and your daily schedule and I'll make all the arrangements .

 

[fls]

Did I ever tell you how much I enjoy your incredibly spot on, incisive, witty, reasoned, articulate and thoroughly entertaining posts? You really are my favorite person here! We really should get together sometime (soon, very soon)! Just send me your address and your daily schedule and I'll make all the arrangements .

She didn't say she had the album cover.

Linda

 

[Safe-Keeper]

Christmas no longer belongs to Christians, it belongs to consumers. Christians are trying to return Christmas to themselves, but it's been a pretty unsuccessful effort.

Seeing Yule originally belonged to North European pagans and that the 'Christmas' we celebrate today is really just the same soup in an Abrahamic bowl (as is pretty much everything in Christianity), they've got no reason to whine.

 

[Coffee]

I'm not bothered by the Christmas holiday any more than Christians were bothered by the Pagans the Christians stole the winter holiday from in the first place. Christmas is the great holiday celebrating capitalism.

Christmas no longer belongs to Christians, it belongs to consumers. Christians are trying to return Christmas to themselves, but it's been a pretty unsuccessful effort.

christmas has never bothered me. I enjoy the gifts.

As for putting the signs on buses being tax subsidized... Huh? Those ads subsidize the buses, not the other way around. There are public service announcements on buses. But there are also ads which generate commercial revenue. I would think the ads in question are paid for by the groups promoting the message.

The Central Ohio Transit Authority works in the manner you describe. The ads are not paid for by taxes at all.

Take that Christians!! It belongs to consumers now!

I'll probably get booed for this but: All your christmas are belong to us.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

She didn't say she had the album cover.

Linda

But I do. My boyfriend in high school bought it. He and his friends soaked the added cover off and nicely preserved the image underneath with some tape which over the years has remained clear and intact. It's in pretty good shape.

Sadly, I inherited the album when he died.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Did I ever tell you how much I enjoy your incredibly spot on, incisive, witty, reasoned, articulate and thoroughly entertaining posts? You really are my favorite person here! We really should get together sometime (soon, very soon)! Just send me your address and your daily schedule and I'll make all the arrangements .

You're on the wrong coast. But thanks for the compliment.

 

[Fronzel]

Will billboards be going up around Ramadan as well? You want to make sure as many religions as possible know you don't believe in them.

Who is the better target? The 260 million Christians or the 2 million Muslims? Who has more of an impact on Atheism?

I don't even know when or what the Eids are. Or when Ramadan is. I know Eid Maburak is around Christmas time, but I couldn't tell you what it is about. I'm guessing they don't get trains and Jihad Joe toys.

Why are Christians in America threatened by Atheism? Is that deep down in places they don't like to talk about at parties, they know we are right?

 

[slingblade]

As for putting the signs on buses being tax subsidized... Huh? Those ads subsidize the buses, not the other way around. There are public service announcements on buses. But there are also ads which generate commercial revenue. I would think the ads in question are paid for by the groups promoting the message.

Yes, but I think it's more the idea that if the busses are paid for (subsidized) in whole or in part by tax dollars, then using them as a medium for promoting religion could be seen as iffy. It's a bit of a stretch, but I can see the argument being made, at least. In fact, I made it, in a different thread.

As a tax payer, and an atheist, I tend to object when things I am forced to pay for through my tax dollars are used to promote religion. Some of that is my money. Some of that money came from adherents of a variety of religions, as well.

But, since simply applying my tax dollars to a public transit system is not the same thing as Congress making laws respecting an establishment of religion, I'm not sure my objection would stand.

On the other hand, does requiring students to pray each morning in public schools equal Congress making laws respecting an establishment of religion? Because that's why we don't have that anymore, in essence. Public tax dollars pay for public schools, and public schools fall under the aegis of local, state, and Federal governments. Students are not, and never have been, barred from praying in school--but the school can't make them pray.

How does one (if one does) apply the first amendment to each thing subsidized by tax dollars? If the government is involved in it, is religion automatically out?

 

[Wildy]

I'll probably get booed for this but: All your christmas are belong to us.

Booooo!!!! BOOOOOOO!!!!

 

[hgc]

Christmas no longer belongs to Christians, it belongs to consumers. Christians are trying to return Christmas to themselves, but it's been a pretty unsuccessful effort.

Trying to return Christmas to srrictly Christian focus isn't only not viable in practical terms. If Christmas were strictly a regligious holiday, it would lose 90% of its public interest, and thus damage the reputation of the importance of the birthday of their god-man. Christians are locked in a death grip with commercial/secular Christmas.

 

[Toke]

Wonder if I got this one right, should read as something under personals.

"I request that there be no attentions/consideration on account of by birthday.
Jesus"

Would look nice on billboards in december

 

[Dunstan]

How does one (if one does) apply the first amendment to each thing subsidized by tax dollars? If the government is involved in it, is religion automatically out?

To answer the second question first: no. In fact, if the government discriminates against religious viewpoints, it usually falls afoul of the Free Exercise Clause. (It may also violate the Free Speech clause, as the government generally isn't allowed to discriminate between speech that expresses a viewpoint the government likes and speech it doesn't.)

For example, if a public school allows all other student groups to use school facilities, but refuses to give the Christian students association or other religious group the same privileges (with the same conditions), that's probably a Free Exercise violation. That would be true even if all religious groups (and/or atheist groups) were denied access. I vaguely recall some cases like this, but I'm too lazy to look them up at the moment.

The problem with school prayer is really the indoctrination/forced speech/peer pressure aspect of it. The government is putting its imprimature on a particular prayer, and there's almost no way to do that without favoring religion generally, and likely one religion or group of religions in particular. (Ever seen those joke "inclusive" prayers that supposedly mock political correctness? What they really show is the impossibility of having a "neutral" prayer that is at all coherent.)

We had another thread here not long ago where we discussed the fact that a true comparative religion class, that studied religion in an impartial, non-proselytizing, and academic way, would be perfectly constitutional. The problem is that there isn't a huge demand for that kind of course in high school, so most religion classes that are likely to be offered are probably being done for proselytizing purposes.

Anyway, in the context of bus advertising, once the government decides that it's going to accept paid advertising, then it is very limited in its ability to reject particular ads. We've seen this before in the context of "sponsor a highway" programs, where the government lets community groups or businesses put a sign on a highway in exchange for a donation. The government can't decide that it's ok to allow the Loyal Order of Waterbuffaloes to sponsor a highway but not the KKK.

Edited to add: I don't want to make it seem like there are a lot of clear answers here. Religion clause jurisprudence is incredible complicated and full of contradictions and nuances. It's one of the rare situations in constitutional law where the government can't really err on the side of caution, because there is no safe side on which to err. The government has to navigate between the Scylla of the Free Exercise Clause and the Charybdis of the Establishment Clause. That's a course that even nine Supreme Court justices can't agree on always, so it's hard to expect even well-intentioned minor government officials to get it "right" all the time.

 

[Ausmerican]

Of course you could always argue that the lack of belief in god is not religion anyway and therefore who cares if the buses are paid for by tax dollars.

 

[Lisa Simpson]

I'm contemplating making a sign for my front yard that says:

A 23-degree axial tilt is the reason for the season.

I don't know though, my Jewish neighbor's house was vandalized once for not putting up Christmas lights.

 

[Elizabeth I]

I'm contemplating making a sign for my front yard that says:

A 23-degree axial tilt is the reason for the season.

I don't know though, my Jewish neighbor's house was vandalized once for not putting up Christmas lights.

You're kidding, right? There could be a ton of reasons for not putting up Christmas lights, ranging from sheer laziness all the way to energy conservation.

 

[Dunstan]

Of course you could always argue that the lack of belief in god is not religion anyway and therefore who cares if the buses are paid for by tax dollars.

For First Amendment purposes, that argument doesn't fly under current precedent, in either direction. The government can't discriminate for or against atheism.

 

[applecorped]

Who is the better target? The 260 million Christians or the 2 million Muslims? Who has more of an impact on Atheism?

I don't even know when or what the Eids are. Or when Ramadan is. I know Eid Maburak is around Christmas time, but I couldn't tell you what it is about. I'm guessing they don't get trains and Jihad Joe toys.

Why are Christians in America threatened by Atheism? Is that deep down in places they don't like to talk about at parties, they know we are right?

 

[Aerik]

And of course, the hateful ignorance is being spoken for by Bob Enyart, who was convicted for child abuse.

http://www.nospank.net/n-e81.htm

http://www.nospank.net/n-e48.htm