Christians = 2, atheists et al = 8.

[Tykster]

Here's an article from a relatively local news outlet. Basically, to appease all denominations, the local courthouse opended up its property to allow any and all Christmas displays. Hilarity ensues.....



Mild spoiler alert, it doesn't mention it in the piece, but the Flying Spaghetti Monster display[1] had a tag line of "Touched by an Angelhair..." 

1.	a nativity scene with an FSM in steady of baby Jesus

[kaziglu bey]

+1 for the article. I love stories like this! So sad that the Christian reaction to this is so aggressive and bitchy. The early bird gets the worm. So revealing how they are for free speech for themselves, but not everyone else. The Santa on a Cross display had me rolling in laughter, as did "Touched by an Angelhair".

[kaziglu bey]

Here is a similar story from CNN: http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/22/us/california-nativity-atheists/index.html?hpt=hp_c1

One of the Christians interviewed in the story says that

We're not saying ban them (the atheists). We're just saying there should be preference given to our local and historic display - the Nativity scenes.

"There's a very militant atheist movement that's trying to drive out vestiges of the truth. They're trying to deny the truth that this nation is founded on Christian principles," Jameson said.

No, Mr. Jameson, you are wrong. The Constitution makes it pretty clear that you get NO preference. Writings from Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Franklin, Paine, and others indicate  very clearly no preference for Christianity or America being a "Christian"nation. Such lies, from the mouth of a spokesperson for Christ. Drive another nail in, asshole. I think this clearly demonstrates that at the very least, there are some Christians who are not interested at all in equality and tolerance, but just me! me! me!.  The ignorance and self serving that is displayed by Jameson here is deplorable.

[Azdgari]

Remember, if you're not being given preference, you're being oppressed.   

[jetson]

No, Mr. Jameson, you are wrong. The Constitution makes it pretty clear that you get NO preference. Writings from Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Franklin, Paine, and others indicate  very clearly no preference for Christianity or America being a "Christian"nation. Such lies, from the mouth of a spokesperson for Christ. Drive another nail in, a**hole. I think this clearly demonstrates that at the very least, there are some Christians who are not interested at all in equality and tolerance, but just me! me! me!.  The ignorance and self serving that is displayed by Jameson here is deplorable.

On the flip side, if people want to argue that this nation was founded on Christian principles/morals, whatever, then they should explain, in detail, why our nation started off with such horrible treatment of blacks and women.  And that's just the popular stuff - including fighting between Christian sects as diversification of Jesus lovers grew.

This Jameson is one of many who simply parrot whatever they have heard, and want to believe - based on their faith in mythology.  They want so desperately to be able to claim ownership of thought and facts.  They want to continue to use their religious dogma to marginalize ANYONE who disagrees.  And they constantly claim that the diversity that has risen from this secular country (the U.S.) is somehow wrong, and has somehow hijacked what they believe is the "right" facts.

Whenever these ridiculous arguments come up, I ask believers to tell me what they want to happen.  Do they want us to revert back to those days when we had "Christian principles"?  What days would those be?  What time period would work?  And guess what - they don;t want to go back in time, to the "good old days" of pure American Christian principles!  Surprise!

They know that we struggled as a nation to live up to a higher standard of freedom and equal rights for ALL people.  They know that we have a shameful history, and that millions were holding their Bibles high in the air proclaiming that it was their God-given right to own slaves.  Asshats.

[Azdgari]

The '50s are the time-period they're talking about.  You know, when America was founded. 

Incidentally, that's when they or their role-models grew up...

[Frank]

From the CNN link

What enabled the atheists to garner the vast majority of the park's exhibit space is they loaded up the applicant pool by constituting 11 of the 13 applications, according to the atheist group The other applicants were for the Menorah scene and the Nativity scene.

If there is a god surely he would have fixed it for the christians to come out of the hat first regardless of how much the atheists loaded it. As it was it was atheist-jewish-atheist. Says something about "gods will". Hmmm.

[kaziglu bey]

On the flip side, if people want to argue that this nation was founded on Christian principles/morals, whatever, then they should explain, in detail, why our nation started off with such horrible treatment of blacks and women.  And that's just the popular stuff - including fighting between Christian sects as diversification of Jesus lovers grew.

Indeed. If they want to say that America was founded on Christian Principles, they are pretty much admitting that slavery, sexism, racism, and child abuse are, in fact, Christian Principles. This is of course entirely OK as far as God is concerned, as per the Bible, and is supported by the evidence we have of how such people treated others.

This Jameson is one of many who simply parrot whatever they have heard, and want to believe - based on their faith in mythology.  They want so desperately to be able to claim ownership of thought and facts.  They want to continue to use their religious dogma to marginalize ANYONE who disagrees.  And they constantly claim that the diversity that has risen from this secular country (the U.S.) is somehow wrong, and has somehow hijacked what they believe is the "right" facts.

It always entertains me when Christians talk about Atheists not wanting to know the "truth". I am not saying that Christians aren't genuinely committed to finding the truth, rather that their methods and ideologies are rather flawed in that respect.

Whenever these ridiculous arguments come up, I ask believers to tell me what they want to happen.  Do they want us to revert back to those days when we had "Christian principles"?  What days would those be?  What time period would work?  And guess what - they don;t want to go back in time, to the "good old days" of pure American Christian principles!  Surprise!

Whenever a Christian woman talks to me about God or Jesus, I know that they haven't read the Bible. If they did, they would just talk to their husbands about it. What does it say about this American Christian Principles when American Christians don't want to follow them?

They know that we struggled as a nation to live up to a higher standard of freedom and equal rights for ALL people.  They know that we have a shameful history, and that millions were holding their Bibles high in the air proclaiming that it was their God-given right to own slaves.  Asshats.

Ah, but they weren't "True Christians^tm", don't ya know? 

[kaziglu bey]

From the CNN link

What enabled the atheists to garner the vast majority of the park's exhibit space is they loaded up the applicant pool by constituting 11 of the 13 applications, according to the atheist group The other applicants were for the Menorah scene and the Nativity scene.

If there is a god surely he would have fixed it for the christians to come out of the hat first regardless of how much the atheists loaded it. As it was it was atheist-jewish-atheist. Says something about "gods will". Hmmm.

Yeah, you would think that his almighty divine influence could have caused the Christians to come out and get their applications in before the Atheists bogged it down. They ought to be glad that this is America and anyone can do that shit, and next time get out there earlier. The early bird gets the worm right?

I also find it interesting that they had vandalism problems on the Atheist locations. So much for tolerance and peace and love. Somehow I don't think "turn the other cheek" meant "trash other people's shit".

[Poseidon]

ALong about 1630, John Winthrop led 1000 men women and children from England to found the Massachusetts Bay colony. These people fled because they were opposed to the strict and miserably narrow religious requirements of the king. Upon pain of imprisonment the people had to wear suplices and use the book of common prayer.  Winthrop, before they left England, reminded them of their purpose: to establish "a city on a hill" dedicated to god and all that good stuff.  They were Puritans and they wanted to have it their way (apologies to the Burger King slogan)

Shortly thereafter a certain Roger Williams arrived from England. He was an educated theologian and a puritan minister. He was one smart individual but he soon earned the derision of the populance and leaders of the colony. His one fault was that he insisted that the state, colony, or quasi government not be involved in the dispensing of religion or meddling in the affairs of the people where their faith was concerned. In short he was the original proponent of separation of church and state.  After all, was not the reason for their taking up a new life the result of the kings iron fisted insistence on his strict interpretations of gods will?

The colonists ran Williams poor ass out of Massachusetts and threatened him with death if he returned. Williams stood his ground about this position but he left. He hauled himself down to the Narraganset Bay area and set up a community that became Providence Rhode Island. Many of the Mass. bay people followed. The followers were religious but they endorsed Williams concept of separation. Williams claimed that involvement in religion by government would corrupt both the government and religion. And so it has remained, in the whole nation not just in Rhode Island. The supreme court has ruled on numerous occassions that speration of church and state is the law of the land. Thank you Roger Williams for making sure that the nation was not founded as a christian nation.

This months Smithsonian magazine has the complete article about the hard headed minister.

[Frank]

Thank you Roger Williams for making sure that the nation was not founded as a christian nation.

Well that's all well and good but maybe if a state religion had been founded you wouldn't be having all this fundie rubbish today. Virtually all the european nations have a state religion yet they are far more secular than America. One of the advantages of a state religion is that it severely curtails any other competing religions plus it avoids creating a vacuum.
Because America didn't have a state religion it created the aformentioned vacuum. Because of this all the competing religions have been pushing and shoving each other to fill this vacuum and become the dominant religion. Hence religion plays a much greater role in American society than in european society.
European nations don't have these wedge issues such as abortion and gay rights. Our politicians don't have to suck up to the christian lunatics because we don't care whether our politicians are religious or not. Atheists don't have to hide away here unlike supposedly secular America. We had our religious wars centuries ago. Americans are having theirs now and in a country were almost everyone is armed that's not a good thing,

So maybe not having a state religion wasn't such a good idea after all.

[jetson]

Interesting point, Frank.  I had never heard it put that way before.

[wright]

Well that's all well and good but maybe if a state religion had been founded you wouldn't be having all this fundie rubbish today. Virtually all the european nations have a state religion yet they are far more secular than America.

-snip-

So maybe not having a state religion wasn't such a good idea after all.

Indeed you may have a point, Frank. I'll have to do some research on that idea.

[Add Homonym]

Thank you Roger Williams for making sure that the nation was not founded as a christian nation.

Well that's all well and good but maybe if a state religion had been founded you wouldn't be having all this fundie rubbish today. Virtually all the european nations have a state religion yet they are far more secular than America. One of the advantages of a state religion is that it severely curtails any other competing religions plus it avoids creating a vacuum.
Because America didn't have a state religion it created the aformentioned vacuum. Because of this all the competing religions have been pushing and shoving each other to fill this vacuum and become the dominant religion. Hence religion plays a much greater role in American society than in european society.
European nations don't have these wedge issues such as abortion and gay rights. Our politicians don't have to suck up to the christian lunatics because we don't care whether our politicians are religious or not. Atheists don't have to hide away here unlike supposedly secular America. We had our religious wars centuries ago. Americans are having theirs now and in a country were almost everyone is armed that's not a good thing,

So maybe not having a state religion wasn't such a good idea after all.

Unless that's wrong, and the secular state makes Americans less religious. ;-)

I've felt this with things like alternative medicine. If one group rose to power, then they claim to be the true faith, and oppress the people who have no evidence for their claims. In Australia, and UK, the Anglicans and Catholics are in power, so they marginalise the evangelicals - who are the main problem.

[Samothec]

Here is another bit of good news:
http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/freedom-from-religion-group-adds-message-to-courthouse-holiday-display-3u3gm8g-135894433.html

[Frank]

Here is another bit of good news:
http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/freedom-from-religion-group-adds-message-to-courthouse-holiday-display-3u3gm8g-135894433.html

This is an example of what I pointed out in my previous post. Because the government cannot take sides you end up with this either/or position. EITHER nobody gets to put up a display OR everyone does. This in turn leads to arguements about whose display is biggest, most prominent, most disrespectful to others, etc etc. This in turn leads to bad feeling all round and nobody is happy. And this is happening right across America as we speak. This relentless undercurrent of bad feeling and resentment. Every tiny decision is contested because of the fear that to give an inch will eventually lead to the giving of a mile.

My country has a state religion yet you would never know it because, even at Christmas, it simply isn't discussed. People who are religious go about their business next to those who aren't and don't step on each others toes. Yet "secular, no state religion" America religion is one of the main causes of societal discontent.

I used to work with a guy who was born again. Apparently he claimed it happened to him while he was on holiday in America (surprise, surprise) yet he was a nice guy and we were good friends. He's listen to his cd's of American pastors yakking on about sin and hellfire. I even put him on to the Rapture Ready site. He was made up. Loved it. A whole bunch of people who thought just like him. We'd have lively disussions about belief and atheism. He's try to convert me and I'd try to convince him how absurd it all was. Neither of us was successful. But it never got nasty. It was possible to discuss it without resorting to insults.

Maybe because of the perceived power of religion in America atheists feel the need to assert themselves to counteract the feeling of exclusion from mainstream society yet I'm not sure it is always a good thing. By always contesting this kind of thing it simply inflates the fundies sense of persecution (and you know they just love that). Maybe it would be better to let them have their display. It makes them feel better and more open to consessions on other more important issues. By pushing them into a corner you may simply be making them more militant, more fundamentalist, more irrational. This kind of thing certainly highlights atheism in America but it also give a platform and credence to those who wish to believe that christianity is under some sort of secular attack and needs to defend itself.

If you leave it alone it will slowly decline, as I think it already is. This kind of thing doesn't accelerate the process it just makes it more painful.

[riley2112]

Could someone let me know what you think of this. I had someone say this to me, just want to get a different take on it .
Atheism: A belief that there is no [absolutely-necessary-entity] and everything in reality is universally sufficient. It makes this assumption without attaining absolute-knowledge, and the limited knowledge it possess is plausible if not universally subjective because we can only conceive reality, not perceive it.

[One Above All]

<snip>

Atheism: Lack of belief in deities.
That's all.
EDIT: Note that "lack of belief" is not the same as "belief in non-existence".

[riley2112]

<snip>

Atheism: Lack of belief in deities.
That's all.
EDIT: Note that "lack of belief" is not the same as "belief in non-existence".

Thank you Lucifer.

[Samothec]

Could someone let me know what you think of this. I had someone say this to me, just want to get a different take on it .
Atheism: A belief that there is no [absolutely-necessary-entity] and everything in reality is universally sufficient. It makes this assumption without attaining absolute-knowledge, and the limited knowledge it possess is plausible if not universally subjective because we can only conceive reality, not perceive it.

Bold mine. This is exactly what is not - as Lucifer says. The other stuff comes later as one reasons and learns but is in no way necessary. Look at it this way, could you believe that there is no god of any kind? No. Belief calls for an emotional attachment and how do you create an emotional attachment to nothing? The greatest danger to religion is knowledge and reason - not an alternate belief. Now, danger to the worshipers can come from other worshipers but that is another matter.

[Samothec]

Well that's all well and good but maybe if a state religion had been founded you wouldn't be having all this fundie rubbish today. Virtually all the european nations have a state religion yet they are far more secular than America. One of the advantages of a state religion is that it severely curtails any other competing religions plus it avoids creating a vacuum.
Because America didn't have a state religion it created the aformentioned vacuum. Because of this all the competing religions have been pushing and shoving each other to fill this vacuum and become the dominant religion. Hence religion plays a much greater role in American society than in european society.
European nations don't have these wedge issues such as abortion and gay rights. Our politicians don't have to suck up to the christian lunatics because we don't care whether our politicians are religious or not. Atheists don't have to hide away here unlike supposedly secular America. We had our religious wars centuries ago. Americans are having theirs now and in a country were almost everyone is armed that's not a good thing,
So maybe not having a state religion wasn't such a good idea after all.

Not correct. Watch the movie "Bowling for Columbine" which documents in part the climate of fear in America. This climate started with the McCarthy era when fear of "godless communists" caused America to add references to god to our money and the pledge of allegiance. And the fear-mongering has continued. So people turn to what comforts them. Unfortunately we Americans can be egotistical so the Xians assume that everyone should be on-board with them and that they should be controlling the country. Add in some demonization of atheists and gays/lesbians and you get our current levels of strife.

This in no way covers everything but it is far more accurate than your evaluation – sorry.

[Poseidon]

Within the annals of history, the church state does not have an enviable track record.  The church is powerful and a church state is even more powerful.  Seventeenth century England was cursed by the religious whims of whomever was in power at the time. The citizens were alternately forced to worship in the catholic way and then in the anglican way under pain of prison or even death. The european inquisitions were all powerful and atheists like us would have been summarily executed by the most painful means imaginable. State sponsored religion is alive and well in many places even today.  Where it exists is almost always in a country that has a preponderance of uneducated people

If we allowed our U.S. fundamentalists to gain exclusive power in government, we'd all be forced to go to church twice on Sunday and once on Wednesday and we'd be forced to acknowledge JC as our lord and savior.. Stem cell research would be in the toilet and all schools would teach creationism while any mention of evolution would be punished and gays would be persecuted and books such as Tom Sawyer would be banned.  The world would be flat again.  That shit cannot and will not be allowed to fly in this disparate society

In the 1950s I lived in Connecticut. That state was largely catholic and it was absolutely illegal to sell any kind of contraceptive.  If any such product was wanted, the only option was to drive to the nearest other state. Citizens were obliged to take a lot of cold showers so as to regulate their libido. What the hell, the pope was, and is, infallible, right? The state came to their senses eventually.

Frank, your premise is interesting but I fervently hope that no state sanctioned, adjudicated, and certainly not required religion will ever cast its ugly shadow on our government or its' people.

[Azdgari]

Frank, do you suggest that Saudi Arabia and Iran are better with a state religion than without?

[jetson]

Frank, do you suggest that Saudi Arabia and Iran are better with a state religion than without?

I don't think Frank was advocating this, but it's still an interesting point.  I think it is interesting from the perspective of "modern times", where it seems that countries such as Great Britain, are indeed more secular, and seem to be largely free from the religious dogma that hounds America like a vicious Pit Bull.

I personally would prefer no state religion at all - but as a thought experiment, anything that has the potential to lessen the impact of a specific religion on the rest of that society sounds good!

[Azdgari]

I know he's not, Jetson.  Clearly, oppressive theocracies are the opposite of what Frank has in mind.  Thing is, which would happen if America did adopt a state religion?  Would the results be more like those of Great Britain, Denmark, etc.?  Or would America drift further toward the theocratic model typified by what we see in Saudi Arabia?

[jetson]

I know he's not, Jetson.  Clearly, oppressive theocracies are the opposite of what Frank has in mind.  Thing is, which would happen if America did adopt a state religion?  Would the results be more like those of Great Britain, Denmark, etc.?  Or would America drift further toward the theocratic model typified by what we see in Saudi Arabia?

Well, the idea of even attempting it scares me personally!  I think that it would result in some fairly serious civil unrest.  I don't think it could happen today, but if we had started out that way, enough time has gone by, and enough diversity has set in to probably make it into the more secular thing it appears to be in other countries who have stuck to having one over their history.

Hell, it even begs the question, why do some countries still have a state religion?  Well, I suppose it could be argued that they are looking right at the U.S. and saying, no thanks, we'll stick to what we have!

[Frank]

Frank, do you suggest that Saudi Arabia and Iran are better with a state religion than without?

Certainly not. They are far too oppressive by modern standards. But there was a time when christianity was just as oppressive. I'm not suggesting that America should adopt a state religion at all. It's far too late for that, should have done it centuries ago like the european countries did. It would be impossible to establish a state religion today. It would upset far to many people. Which one would you pick anyway? On sheer numbers it would have to be catholic. I'm sure the Pope would be ecstatic but I doubt the baptists would be very happy at all.
What I'm saying is this separation of church and state you are so proud of and struggle so hard to preserve isn't quite the great idea that it seemed at its inception. I'm sure it started out with good intentions but maybe if the founding fathers could have seen the problems it's causing today. The way its been hijacked by rightwing christian fundamentalists to basically undermine the constitution, corrupt the political process, pervert the legal system, curtail or even take away peoples civil rights, oppress peoples right to free speech, and make millionaires out of charlatans and self appointed "pastors" then maybe they would have thought twice before deciding not to have a state religion.

[Poseidon]

If we presume that a church state would fairly regulate the ambitions and greed of those charlatan pastors, then Frank has  a good and valid point. 

That reminds me of a long ago episode in the life of Oral Roberts. Oral went to the top of the tower on his campus. There he had a serious conversation with god. God told Oral to raise eight million dollars or he would be struck dead. The congregants and supporters, upon hearing of gods demand, raised the eight mil' right away.

[Azdgari]

Fair enough re: not instituting a state religion in America now, Frank.  I misunderstood your intentions.

I think you're picking-and-choosing your data-set though, when you judge present-day nations with state religions as being better off than those without.  That was part of why I brought up Saudi Arabia and Iran.  Yes, Iran had a secular phase with the Shah, but it was Muslim before that, and there are plenty of other examples of states founded with a state religion that are now awful, oppressive places.

Had America started out with a state religion, which would it have resembled more?