Monday, December 19, 2005

American Atheists Inc UPDATED

An earlier post has gotten alittle off topic in the comments, but has spawned a great arguement. Lucy Jones has discovered the facts behind a cross-story I brought up: LUCY JONES:How did I know I would find it at American Atheists...Seems it's not the ACLU, it's the American Atheists, Inc.....Nearly 200 people rallied in Salt Lake City, Utah on Saturday to protest a lawsuit calling for the removal of 12-foot-high Christian crosses erected on public property to memorialize state troopers killed in the line of duty......The crosses were erected by the Utah Highway Patrol Association, a private, not-for-profit Utah Corporation which has, among its goals, supporting state law enforcement officers "and acknowledging those troopers' service to the people of the State of Utah......The 12-foot-high crosses include the names and badge number of a fallen trooper, and are erected "near the location where a trooper has died in the line of duty.... It seems the far-left organizations know no boundaries, and will now attack dead mens religious symbols. Makes my stomach sick... UPDATE:Check out this Gallup Poll..

80 Comments:

At 12/19/2005 09:40:00 PM, Blogger Willis said...

Nice spin, TC. You have learned well.

The issue isn't religion, or commemorating the dead, it is the government espousing a particular religion.

You say you believe in the Constitution. Well, it provides against government establishment of religion.

So what is so out of line?? What makes you sick???

 
At 12/19/2005 09:50:00 PM, Blogger too conservative said...

Other readers-

Is it just me that find this sickening? A dead mans religious symbol?

 
At 12/19/2005 09:50:00 PM, Blogger Willis said...

It's the state BUYING a cross for a dead man.

That's the problem.

 
At 12/19/2005 10:13:00 PM, Blogger mitch's wife said...

The state didn't BUY IT.

It was put there by a PRIVATE GROUP.

 
At 12/19/2005 10:16:00 PM, Blogger Willis said...

That's debateable. Lucy said that was the case, but according to the link I'll provide, it seems that the Utah Department of Transportation is intimately involved. The crosses carry their logo, in fact.

http://www.atheists.org/flash.line/utah12.htm

 
At 12/19/2005 10:58:00 PM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

Lucy didn't say it. The atheists said it. Actual Document is here.

They are suing, among others, Colonel Scott T. Duncan, Superintendant of Utah Highway Control, because "he has the administrative power to determine who will be allowed to use the trade marked logo of the Utah Highway Patrol. He is sued in his official capacity as well as his individual capacity."

The markers are provided by the Utah Highway Patrol Association which is a private, non-profit Utah corporation.

And yes, MAKES ME SICK!!! No spin needed willis.

Yes, they carry the logo. THE MAN WAS WEARING THE LOGO WHEN HE DIED FOR WHAT IT STANDS FOR.

It's not like they could help getting killed on public property. I bet the State even paid for their funerals in churches!. Imagine that! You gonna take that away too?

Yep, my hackles are up. Hope I can find a way to help good ole' Utah.

 
At 12/19/2005 11:05:00 PM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

Exactly what kind of non-economic injury are these crosses causing the Atheists? Does it hurt their feelings to know that some brave guy died saving their behinds?

No, Willis, before you even ask, it wouldn't bother me if the guy was a devil worshiper and they had to put a pentagram on there. I would feel even more sorry for that guy.

 
At 12/19/2005 11:12:00 PM, Blogger too conservative said...

Lucy- GREAT POINT.

Many people spend their entire lives working under a certain religion/set or morals. After they die, is it the least we can do to make sure their after-life symbol can be placed by their grave?

I agree lucy on the devil worshippers, if they want it , they should have it..and they do.

Jewish people get star of davids when they die in Arlington cemetary ect.

 
At 12/19/2005 11:13:00 PM, Blogger AWCheney said...

Mitch's Wife, there is truly no point in suggesting that this "gentleman" is wrong. His reading comprehension is very much like children's selective hearing...and just as annoying.

 
At 12/19/2005 11:40:00 PM, Blogger Willis said...

AWCheney- thanks for yet another personal attack. You should be proud.

TC- yet again, I have to correct you for deliberately mis-stating the problem. The issue has nothing to do with placing a cross on a headstone when someone dies. It has nothing to do with commemorating the dead, in any way.

The issue is the government espousing a particular religious belief. You should stop deliberately misstating the argument, because you sound like an idiot.

Lucy- it's not about injury, they are suing for one dollar. It's about respecting the establishment clause of the Constitution. By placing their logo on the crosses, the government of Utah is espousing Christianity. That is illegal, and the lawsuit is completely justified.

 
At 12/19/2005 11:43:00 PM, Blogger Willis said...

I don't blame you guys, actually. You haven't experienced religious persecution. As christians, you are a member of the vast majority, and while Bill O'Reilly might convince some of you that you are being persecuted, you really aren't.

I, on the other hand, have experienced persecution and discrimination. I understand it better than any of you ever will. And thus, I take issues like this very seriously.

 
At 12/20/2005 12:00:00 AM, Blogger too conservative said...

Willis-
I have sat in class, as people have discussed Jesus possibly being a homosexual.

I was also thrown out of class by my athiest teacher and called a "bible-beater".

This is just one of many stories(one which Chad has up), that are simply disgusting.

I understand what it has to legally do with...but in the end..it is dealing with dead peoples crosses. How is the government esposing a particular belief? HOW!? Just because it is on public property? a dead persons tombstone?

You sound SICK agreeing to this willis.

 
At 12/20/2005 12:05:00 AM, Blogger Willis said...

So if I think Jesus was a homosexual, I shouldn't voice it out of respect for YOUR religious beliefs???

Why don't Republicans, then, stop praising god in public places, out of respect for MY religious viewpoint???

You say you were thrown out of class, yet you say nothing about what precipitated that action. I'd be interested in what you said/did that forced the teacher to throw you out.

The government is espousing a belief by putting their logo on a cross, placed on public property. A cross is a religious symbol. Thus, the government is espousing a religious belief.

You have no idea what it is like to be an atheist in a country trying to become a christian state. The examples you stated are mild by comparison.

 
At 12/20/2005 12:07:00 AM, Blogger AWCheney said...

Willis, what you perceive as a personal attack is a compliment compared to your persistent bating of TC in every string...even if you have to go off-topic to do it, which you do constantly. After taking a look at your profile (just curious), I realized that this is mere jealousy on your part. You are, in fact, a contemporary of TC's yet you are ill-equipped to parry on his turf, as witnessed by far too many of your paranoid, nonsensical posts. Interestingly enough, we who have respect for TC are old enough to be your parents or grandparents. That said, do not be surprised when we treat you as a child...and treat TC as an adult. I do, however, apologize for the suggestion that you seek a psychiatrist. Knowing, as I do now, your tender years a guidance councilor may suffice.

 
At 12/20/2005 12:10:00 AM, Blogger AWCheney said...

BTW Willis, that said, I no longer feel the need to respond to you in any way. Hence, I will consider the source and take it for what it's worth.

 
At 12/20/2005 12:12:00 AM, Blogger Willis said...

AW- You are really something. My mental health is my own business, though I thank you for taking an interest.

This argument is between me and TC. If I "can't parry on his turf," then why not let him fight his own battles?? Why feel the need to insult me in this manner??

 
At 12/20/2005 12:20:00 AM, Blogger too conservative said...

The story:

My teacher refused to say under god, as she felt it was a violation of church and state, and told the class they didnt have to say it.

I told her that I could not believe she told the class that, and that I had no respect for her anymore.

She kicked me out, and yelled at me for being a "bible-beater"...

-and willis..there is such thing as respect, and calling jesus homosexual is not respectful.

I don't know who Willis is...but sometimes the posts just make no sense...

 
At 12/20/2005 12:29:00 AM, Blogger Willis said...

Well, I don't know that she should have thrown you out, but you were certainly out of line.

Nobody has to say "under god" when they recite the pledge. Nobody even has to say the pledge.

Even if you disagreed with her sentiment, standing up and claiming you've lost all respect for her is completely out of line. Civil discourse is important for fostering debate, and respect for teachers is important.

So, again I ask you: if I've done research, and I truly believe jesus to be homosexual, should I keep that to myself to avoid offending christians??

 
At 12/20/2005 12:29:00 AM, Blogger AWCheney said...

One last time young man...I have not been defending TC. As you say, he has no need (which I implied...mind your reading comprehension). I have been expressing my frustration at the nonsense you have put forth, much of which I have considered an insult to our collective intelligence (I hope everyone will pardon me for my presumption).

Consider this a post script to my previous post and, 'nuff said.

 
At 12/20/2005 12:31:00 AM, Blogger too conservative said...

Mrs.Cheney-
Send me an e-mail at this address tonight if you can
chairman@vatars.org

 
At 12/20/2005 02:03:00 AM, Blogger Willis said...

Don't hate the atheists.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1989861879084829890&q=atheist

 
At 12/20/2005 06:16:00 AM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

Whew, I actually had to get up and leave the room last night. First time for everything.

Willis,

Look at:

#24, "Plaintiffs have suffered direct and personal contact with the Latin crosses causing non-economic injury to them."

#25, "Plaintiffs' harm is actual personal injury..."

And, yes sir, it's ALL about religion. Otherwise, the atheists wouldn't care and they wouldn't be continuously attacking one of the most religious states in the union, Utah. And they wouldn't be eating away at the core of religion. Why don't they go and pick on dog owners that don't care for their dogs? Because they don't care. It's all about religion.

We don't hate the Atheists. We hate where this is going:

**Are you going to fight that I can't have a bible in my car because someone in a public parking lot might look in and see it the seat?

**Are you somehow going to construe that since I'm a public employee, and paid by tax dollars that I can't put money in the Church offering plate?

**Are you going to fight that since I'm driving on the public roads, I can't have a "God Loves Ya" sticker on my car?

**Are you going to go further and say since they're public roads, I can't use them to get to my church or synagogue?

**Are you going to go even further and say that since the public utilities are public, that churches can't use water and sewage so they can only be placed way out in the country somewhere?

**Are you going to go so far as to just mow down my church because it bothers you to have to drive by it?

You want to talk about persecution? We have just as much right under the laws that you just love to hold to words instead of intent. Do you think our forefathers would have ever even tried to separate religion and state if they had known what the non-believers would do with the law? The intent is to allow everyone to worship NOT to keep them from it. I believe if you look back at the history of this country that you live in we came here to avoid this very persecution.

Are the atheists not going to stop until we are all hidden in a basement somewhere with our bibles???

Tell me, why are atheists so afraid of a cross? And don't even try to go spouting it's a violation of your rights. That's hogwash!

 
At 12/20/2005 06:21:00 AM, Blogger AWCheney said...

Yay Lucy...you go girl!!!

 
At 12/20/2005 12:47:00 PM, Blogger neocon22 said...

this is another example of tyranny of the minority. what is wrong with honoring those who died protecting Utah's citizens? why should this offend anyone?

 
At 12/20/2005 03:52:00 PM, Blogger Willis said...

Geez Lucy. So many misrepresentations. I'll go through each and every one.

"And, yes sir, it's ALL about religion."

Of course it is. It's about the state establishing and supporting a particular religious belief.

"Otherwise, the atheists wouldn't care and they wouldn't be continuously attacking one of the most religious states in the union, Utah."

No state can be a religious state. It says so in the Constitution. So unless you want to live in a theocracy (and I think you do) then Utah is, and will always be, a secular state.

"And they wouldn't be eating away at the core of religion. Why don't they go and pick on dog owners that don't care for their dogs? Because they don't care. It's all about religion."

Is there something in the Constitution about dogs??? I must have missed it.

"We don't hate the Atheists. We hate where this is going"

You absolutely hate atheism. You demand respect from us in every regard, but you don't give us any at all. As TC said, claiming jesus may be homosexual is, to him, persecution. Yet, faith-based legislation is perfectly fine with him. It is the ultimate hypocrisy.

"**Are you going to fight that I can't have a bible in my car because someone in a public parking lot might look in and see it the seat?"

NO.

"**Are you somehow going to construe that since I'm a public employee, and paid by tax dollars that I can't put money in the Church offering plate?"

No.

"**Are you going to fight that since I'm driving on the public roads, I can't have a "God Loves Ya" sticker on my car?"

No.

"**Are you going to go further and say since they're public roads, I can't use them to get to my church or synagogue?"

No.

"**Are you going to go even further and say that since the public utilities are public, that churches can't use water and sewage so they can only be placed way out in the country somewhere?"

No.

"**Are you going to go so far as to just mow down my church because it bothers you to have to drive by it?"

No.

"We have just as much right under the laws that you just love to hold to words instead of intent."

Yes you do, but so do we. And its time for you to show some respect to non-christians by not pushing your religion in our face every day.

"Do you think our forefathers would have ever even tried to separate religion and state if they had known what the non-believers would do with the law?"

Of course they would. Thomas Jefferson was an atheist, and many of the forefathers including Franklin have beautiful quotes on why the seperation of church and state is ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY. Remember, they had just left England where they were being persecuted. They knew it very well.

"The intent is to allow everyone to worship NOT to keep them from it. I believe if you look back at the history of this country that you live in we came here to avoid this very persecution."

Correct. And that is why it is so incredibly important to keep the government out of religion.

"Are the atheists not going to stop until we are all hidden in a basement somewhere with our bibles???"

That's just ridiculous. You have made a series of ridiculous claims here, all without backing, that have no basis in reality.

"Tell me, why are atheists so afraid of a cross? And don't even try to go spouting it's a violation of your rights. That's hogwash!"

We're not afraid of crosses. We don't want the government to support christianity, because it goes against the Constitution. We are fighting for our constitutional rights. You should respect that.

 
At 12/20/2005 07:31:00 PM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

Willis,

Thomas Jefferson was not an atheist. Read your history book again. Or you can go here.

In 1774, while serving in the Virginia Assembly, Jefferson personally introduced a resolution calling for a Day of Fasting and Prayer.

In 1779, as Governor of Virginia, Jefferson decreed a day of “Public and solemn thanksgiving and prayer to Almighty God.”

On March 4, 1805, President Jefferson offered “A National Prayer for Peace”

----------------------

Now,

I have tried and tried to somehow see if I could understand how you must feel and I just can't. I am not Jewish but when I see menorahs they don't make me ill, they're beautiful. When I see Buddah statues, they don't make me feel bad. I just don't get it. Why can't you do the same? Why can't you look at these things and just see them for their beauty and importance to other people? Are atheists not at least compassionate? And even if you can't see their beauty, why would it bother you that someone else might find solace and meaning in them? Are you so negative that there is no beauty left in your life, that you have no compassion for others? I know what the words of the declaration say and you can hold them to whatever meaning you want but do these pieces of wood and jade really make you physically ill?

You know, Willis, something really ironic dawned on me today. The atheists are actually defeating themselves. This isn't like getting a red mohawk and doing anything you can to create a stir. Society will just look at a mohawk and say "Whatever, glad that's not my kid" and move on. Christians, on the other hand, are not going to do that. By trying to take our religion away, you are making us even more active. Some folks that maybe didn't go to church very much are starting to go. People that didn't really get involved in these issues are raising their voices. I bet I've heard Merry Christmas and Happy Hannukah more times in the last few weeks than I've heard in my entire life. Even stores like Wal-Mart are sending letters to their employees making it very clear that it's perfectly fine to say Merry Christmas, Happy Hannukah or Happy Holidays if they want.

The atheists are actually propelling religion in this country like no evangelist ever could. Stores and tv executives used to tippy-toe around the subject, but no more. It's on the news, the radio, the stores, etc. There is no preacher in the world that has ever gotten this much public coverage. No greater venue to get the Word out. You want religion in your face? Keep trying to take it away. Christians have overcome great battles for hundreds of years, Jews have overcome the likes of Hitler. What makes you think we will bow down to you now?

You may want to take a long thoughtful time with yourself and make sure you are supporting the movement that you think you are. I'm not saying it's wrong to be an athiest. If that's the life you choose to lead, then so be it. But you will have to answer one day for what you do. We believe you will have to answer to God but even if you don't believe in that, you will answer. You will answer to employers, you will answer to your children, you will answer to society. When you are old and nearing the end of the path, you will answer to yourself. Are you going to be able to look back when you are 80 and say, I made my mark and it was a good one? You better think long and hard.

 
At 12/20/2005 07:46:00 PM, Blogger Willis said...

Lucy-- You have yet again misrepresented what I have said, and what my views are. It is frustrating to have to correct you every single time you post, but I guess I have to.

First, where did I say crosses made me feel ill?? Where did I say menorahs made me feel ill?? Where, in fact, did I say any religion, or religious symbol, made me feel ill?? Go back and re-read if you have to, because I never said that.

I see religion and religious symbols as important to people, and I respect that. I'm not trying to take that away from anyone, nor are other atheists.

What we disagree with is the GOVERNMENT espousing a particular religious view. How many times do I have to say this, before you recognize it?? I'm not trying to take your religion away, or anyone's religion away. I would never try to do that.

I'm giving christianity, and every other religion, the respect afforded it by the Constitution. Atheists, however, are not being afforded the same respect, and that is why court cases are necessary.

 
At 12/21/2005 12:28:00 AM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

Willis,

Your words: "I, on the other hand, have experienced persecution and discrimination. I understand it better than any of you ever will."

per·se·cute
1) To oppress or harass with ill-treatment, especially because of race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or beliefs.
2) To annoy persistently; bother.

dis·crim·i·nate
To make distinctions on the basis of class or category without regard to individual merit; show preference or prejudice.

If religious symbols don't bother you, how in the world do memorial crosses oppress or harrass you? How do they persistently annoy you?

The constitution was written, in my opinion, to prohibit the government from creating a "state religion", not commanding the government to obliterate every symbol of religion. If Jewish people get the Star of David and Christians get crosses, and atheists get whatever it is you get, then how is the government creating a state religion, or as you put it sooooo many times "espousing a particular religion"?

Are you saying that if Utah finds out the religious beliefs of each of these troopers and puts the correct religious symbol on their marker, the atheists will be satisfied?

 
At 12/21/2005 01:36:00 AM, Blogger Willis said...

Crosses don't bother me in and of themselves. When the government gets involved in the placement of crosses on public property, that bothers me.

There's a big difference.

 
At 12/21/2005 01:43:00 AM, Blogger Willis said...

Remember, "freedom of religion" is also "freedom from religion."

You said this: "If Jewish people get the Star of David and Christians get crosses, and atheists get whatever it is you get..."

Atheists don't "get" anything. That's the point.

Having any god, be it the christian god, the jewish god, the muslim god, the hindu gods, supported on public property is discriminatory to atheists.

Private property is private for a reason, and you can do whatever you want there. Public property needs to be acceptable to everyone, and supporting a particular god, or even an ambiguous one, is dicscriminatory to atheists.

Again, I wish you would give us the respect you believe we aren't giving you (even though we are giving it).

 
At 12/21/2005 08:17:00 AM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

So along that vein, you would also have to say that the constitution guarantees you freedom "from" race?

 
At 12/21/2005 08:48:00 AM, Blogger Willis said...

What in the world are you talking about?? What exactly is freedom from race, anyway???

Freedom of religion is also freedom from religion. If it isn't, my elected representatives should tell me, and I'll move to a different country which will respect my rights as an atheist.

And to answer your previous quote: "If Jewish people get the Star of David and Christians get crosses, and atheists get whatever it is you get..."

I did some thinking, and what athests would "get", I guess, is a big, 12 foot tall sign, reading "GOD DOES NOT EXIST".

If you tell me that you would be fine with a sign, 12 feet tall, reading those words in big, bold letters, on public property, with government logos on it, then, well, at least you are consistent.

Otherwise, you have been deceptive in your responses here.

 
At 12/21/2005 10:39:00 AM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

 
At 12/21/2005 11:49:00 AM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

Sure, "God does not exist" would be fine with me if you think that would be a respectful way to honor you, as fallen police officer. Maybe you could even put something peaceful like a nice tree with golden leaves to represent the autumn solstice?

How about if police officers are asked at the time of their employment what marker they would want, if any?


What law exactly do you claim gives you the freedom from religion?

 
At 12/21/2005 01:02:00 PM, Blogger Willis said...

Freedom of religion, as expressed in the constitution, is freedom from religion as well.

If you disagree with me, I'd refer you to a constitutional lawyer, because that certainly has been established.

So, you really wouldn't mind if an Atheist police officer had a 12 foot tall banner proclaiming the nonexistence of god, emblazoned with the Utah dept of transportation logo, by the side of the road on public property???

Astounding.

 
At 12/21/2005 01:34:00 PM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

No, I wouldn't if that's what his family felt was respectful. It's no worse than a pentagram.

Anyway, if you can say that these crosses are illegal then what is to keep the crosses in Arlington from being illegal? They are also on government property.

If "freedom of religion, as expressed in the constitution, is freedom from religion" then the law would also have to be applied to speech as in: freedom of speech is freedom from speech. Therefore, if freedom from religion allows atheists the right to demand the restriction of anything that promotes any religion then they would also have to demand the restriction of anything that promotes any speech.

Not something I would want.

 
At 12/21/2005 01:43:00 PM, Blogger Willis said...

Well, again, I point you to rulings made by the supreme court, and opinions held by almost every constitutional lawyer. Freedom of religion is freedom from religion as well. This is necessary to protect atheists like me.

I have this to ask you: what crosses in Arlington cemetary??

 
At 12/21/2005 02:04:00 PM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

Here's a good page. It shows crosses, star of david and others. Families are given the choice of what symbol they want on the headstones. They don't have to be religious, they can be Air Force symbol, Navy, etc.

 
At 12/21/2005 02:08:00 PM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

Here are the approved symbols for Arlington.

 
At 12/21/2005 02:23:00 PM, Blogger Willis said...

So, there are 29 symbols. Why did you mention crosses exclusively then?? Were you making the same mistake Dick Cheney made??

I don't have a problem with religious symbols at cemetaries or on gravestones, even in a public cemetary. In my view, your body is private property, and the ground in which you are laid to rest is private property as well.

 
At 12/21/2005 02:45:00 PM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

Well, at least you'll give us that!

Anyway, I learned what the gov't-approved emblem for atheists is.

What does that symbol stand for?

 
At 12/21/2005 02:49:00 PM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

No, no mistake. There are definitely crosses there.

 
At 12/21/2005 05:30:00 PM, Blogger Willis said...

I bet you thought the actual headstone was a cross. Dick Cheney made the same mistake.

I don't like the Atheist symbol. My guess is a believer created it, because I've never seen it before.

A cemetary, though, is different from other public property. And, as I've said, I think the land in which you are buried can be classified as private property.

 
At 12/21/2005 06:50:00 PM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

No, I've been there many times. My parents will rest there along with several other ancestors. Friends are there as well. Oddly enough, there's a 5 year old girl buried there that died on the day I was born. Her name is exactly the same as mine.

 
At 12/21/2005 08:59:00 PM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

By the way, the emblem for the atheists is an atomic symbol per the American Atheists.

 
At 12/21/2005 09:16:00 PM, Blogger Willis said...

Tea, I figured that. It's alright I guess, but it's sad that Atheists need a symbol to represent recognition of the absence of evidence for divinity.

I guess if everyone needs a symbol, that one is ok for atheists. Really, though, the term "atheism" shouldn'
t exist, and "atheists" shouldn't be called anything.

 
At 12/21/2005 09:56:00 PM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

I think a-theism is the "anti" of "theism". So, I guess, the opposite of theism. The opposite of "belief in the existence of a god or gods".

Even "the artist formerly known as Prince" needs a symbol, huh?

 
At 12/22/2005 09:24:00 AM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

Not normal...

 
At 12/22/2005 09:24:00 AM, Blogger Willis said...

That is true, but "atheist" is the only term used to describe a person who "lacks a belief" in something.

To me, those who believe are "theists" but the lack of a belief isn't anything. Just normal.

 
At 12/22/2005 12:07:00 PM, Blogger Willis said...

Are you racist???

No, right??

Do you call yourself aracist??

 
At 12/22/2005 05:56:00 PM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

No I'm not racist.

Good point.

Hmm. I had to go look that up in the thesaurus to see what the antonym was. There isn't one.

 
At 12/22/2005 06:11:00 PM, Blogger Willis said...

Say you lived in a town filled with a majority of people who were white supremecists. Racist people. And racist thought was commonplace, and racism was assumed in everyone you met.

Wouldn't it get annoying to have to call yourself "aracist" whenever you talked to anybody?? Wouldn't it get annoying to be classified as "aracist" all the time??

Maybe thats not the best analogy, but hopefully you understand.

 
At 12/22/2005 06:30:00 PM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

Nope, I'd move. I couldn't stand that much hate.

 
At 12/22/2005 06:33:00 PM, Blogger Willis said...

Well, that might be what I have to do, eventually.

But first, I'm gonna stick around and fight for a bit.

 
At 12/22/2005 07:38:00 PM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

You think the religious are hateful? They treat you badly? I'm sure the zealots do, they treat everyone badly, but in your everyday life?

 
At 12/22/2005 08:23:00 PM, Blogger Willis said...

You said yourself that you would leave that town if you had to call yourself aracist in your conversations, and were constantly labeled that by others.

Thats exactly what happens to atheists in america.

 
At 12/22/2005 08:46:00 PM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

I don't think you necessarily have to go around proclaiming your religious status. (Not comparing to the racist example because that's just a whole 'nuther deal). and not out of shame either. I can honestly say I have no clue what religion most of my neighbors are. I have no clue what most of my co-workers practice and I've known some of them for 20+ years. I know one of my friends is also an Atheist and he is honestly one of the coolest people I know. It's just not a subject that comes up.

I never even look at other bloggers profiles unless, like you, they say something that seems bizarre. Would you think some of your comments are somewhat abrasive and could promote some of the grief you get?

 
At 12/22/2005 09:30:00 PM, Blogger Willis said...

I'm deliberately abrasive. Nice people get ignored in debates like this. I feel like I have to shake you guys out of your coma, so yes, I'm abrasive.

In everyday conversations, of course I don't have to reveal my atheism. You wouldn't have to call yourself aracist in the hypothetical racist town either, when buying oranges at the grocery store.

But I think its pretty obvious that a belief in god is expected in our society. Our representatives use the term liberally, and rarely do they recognize publicly that 5% of America doesn't think there is a god of any sort. Even though they might not know what particular faith a person belongs to, I'd bet most people assume the person is a believer of some sort.

 
At 12/23/2005 07:13:00 AM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

I would agree on the point that I probably assume most people are believers although I hope it doesn't change the way I treat anyone. (Well, except for the devil worshipers. I try to avoid them so they don't eat my children. They're just plain scary.) I would also agree that most politicians may feel that way as well and I hope that doesn't change the way they treat the law. It is a natural assumption since most in this country are believers and most of us think this country was originated by believers.

For the abrasiveness, I don't know about nice people getting ignored. It may be the age difference but I've learned in my life that abrasive hardly ever gets you anywhere in the adult world unless you live in a gang. That's not saying that everyone should conform. There are just more effective ways to get your point across. When you say things that are really off the wall, I would think most people either ignore it or just assume the speaker is a "nut". Either way the comment is disregarded. This is a pretty conservitive blog and to be able to get your point across you may have to use a different communication style if you want to make a difference.

I have to give you some respect for being brave enough to hang out over here. I have visited the American Atheist blog and some of the more extreme democrat blogs and I just couldn't even stay there. Their beliefs are so radically different than mine it seems we have absolutely nothing in common and can't even begin to have a "conversation".

 
At 12/23/2005 03:11:00 PM, Blogger Willis said...

Assumptions, on your part and on public officials' part, can't help but change the way a person acts, and the way law is made. It's an unfortunate fact.

Abrasive isn't the best word or my behavior. "Blunt", I think, is better. I'm not going to beat around the bush and engage in meaningless niceties to butter up someone. That's pointless and a waste of my time. If people consistently ignore people who don't engage in these pointless niceties, then they deserve to live in ignorance. I don't want to reach them, and they, apparently, don't want to be reached, or can't take it. Fine.

The things I say only seem off the wallt o you because of the environment you surround yourself with. You aren't used to talking to an atheist, or talking to non-conservatives, I would bet. Even if you were, you certainly wouldn't be used to talking to someone with as strong viewpoints and blunt personality as me. So I can see how it would be off-putting at first, but that has as much to do with you as it does with me.

I try to get a good picture of what everyone is thinking, and at this point I have liberal and conservative thought patterns down. Of course everyone doesn't think the same, but conservatives especially tend to think in similar patterns.

Believe it or not, I've had similar arguments on other blogs on the same topics, and they've gone to same route as the ones here. So, I know what I'm doing, I guess.

Anyway, I think i've gotten to you, Ms. Lucy. I got you to say you would be ok with 12 foot tall atheist signs on public property. I doubt you would have said that at the outset.

 
At 12/23/2005 10:17:00 PM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

Nah, you can't take credit for me being fair enough to put the atheist symbol. Look waaaaay back up there. Comment #7. Even a pentagram would have been ok.

You will never "have liberal and conservative thought patterns down". People change too much. That's the beauty of humans.

And you're way wrong about the people that surround me. I would guess I probably have more non conservative friends than conservative. I don't know the religions of most of them but I know there's at least one atheist, one buddist and one muslim. I have straight friends, gay friends, rich and poor, rednecks, yuppsters, all the rest. Now my children's friends could be anything. I would be afraid to ask some of them in fear of what the answer might be. Weird folks, those 20-year-olds. Our family just refers to them as aliens.

 
At 12/24/2005 02:07:00 AM, Blogger Willis said...

Well, you do know that your gay and atheist friends deserve to be executed, and that your Muslim and Buddhist friends will be damned to hell for all eternity.

That's what Jesus said, anyway.

 
At 12/24/2005 07:23:00 AM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

I prefer the part where he said I can show them the light by the way I live my life...

 
At 12/24/2005 10:40:00 AM, Blogger Willis said...

So you don't trust Jesus??

 
At 12/24/2005 02:17:00 PM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

Yes, I do completely.

 
At 12/24/2005 06:53:00 PM, Blogger Willis said...

So, then you must believe that gays and atheists deserve to be executed.

 
At 12/24/2005 06:54:00 PM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

No, not by humans. I don't believe in the death penalty nor do I believe that being gay is a sin.

 
At 12/25/2005 12:05:00 AM, Blogger Willis said...

That means you don't trust Jesus.

You lie.

 
At 12/25/2005 07:32:00 AM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

No, you're just plain wrong.

 
At 12/25/2005 04:38:00 PM, Blogger Willis said...

Did Jesus not say those things??? I'm certain he did. The bible says so.

 
At 12/25/2005 05:39:00 PM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

Not that I know of.

 
At 12/25/2005 09:36:00 PM, Blogger Willis said...

You should read the bible more carefully then, because Jesus definitely said that homos and atheists should be executed. In fact, he said he wanted to watch atheists get killed right in front of him.

Either you don't trust Jesus (or don't trust that the bible is correct), or you believe atheists and homos should be executed.

Pick.

 
At 12/25/2005 10:55:00 PM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

Ahhhhh, but there is one more choice... The atheists can find God and be just as welcome in heaven as anyone else.

 
At 12/26/2005 12:54:00 AM, Blogger Willis said...

Assuming they don't and won't, then you think they should be excecuted.

Because thats what Jesus said. Either you don't trust Jesus, or you think this.

Noncommittal answers won't get you anywhere with god. Prove your faithfulness by answering this question!!!

 
At 12/26/2005 09:33:00 AM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

That wasn't noncommittal. If atheists don't find God before the end of their path then I believe they will not be welcomed to Heaven.

Does that mean that Christians should persecute or execute them? NO. Just the opposite. Christians should pray for them and pray for guidance on how to help them open their minds and see The Light.

 
At 12/27/2005 12:12:00 AM, Blogger Willis said...

Well, Jesus said to execute the non-believers. Just FYI.

 
At 12/27/2005 06:45:00 AM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

Where? Book and Chapter?

 
At 12/27/2005 10:18:00 AM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

I think I found what you are referring to here:

Luke 19:27 (see 19:11-27)
----------------------------------
"But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them - bring them here and kill them in front of me."
-----------------------------------
This "command" from Jesus is actually part of a parable, rather than a direct command. The parable is apparently meant to illustrate what will occur when God judges the world. One of those events will be the "second death" of those who rejected God, i.e. their condemnation to hell, which is what 19:27 illustrates.

 
At 12/27/2005 10:29:00 AM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

Here are some interesting articles you may like. Check out G. Zeinelde Jordan if you have time.

 
At 12/27/2005 09:20:00 PM, Blogger Willis said...

I could offer you testimonials of christians who are now atheistic. In fact, the majority of atheists were once christians.

Whether you view it as a parable or not, Jesus did say it.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home