Atheist Billboard in Omaha

[Husker_x]

So if we have a group of people that are organized in their shared beliefs whatever they may be, does this make atheism a religion? I really don't see any difference between atheist groups like this and something like Scientology.

 

The difference is disbelieving in God is not itself a belief, kind of like saying "No thanks, not hungry" when the waiter asks what everyone is having is not an order. Scientology is a religion like Christianity. Atheism is neither a positive statement about the existence or non-existence of god or a religion.

 

These billboards are a part of what's known as the 'atheist visibility movement.' As recently as the early 90s, then-candidate and soon-to-be-president George HW Bush went on record as saying that atheists should not be considered as patriots or citizens. Atheism has historically been linked with immorality or some kind of character defect, ridiculous though it may be. The reality is being an outspoken about your lack of belief or religious participation in our country can be socially or economically damaging. Some atheist groups have borrowed tactics from the Gay Rights movement simply to raise awareness that a growing number of people do not in fact share the dominant religious persuasions, and to encourage closeted atheists to take their place at the table. What's interesting about this billboard is that it is completely content neutral. Nowhere does it mock God, gods, or the religious--yet its very existence will be interpreted as an insult or a threat by many people.

[JJ Husker]

Well I really don't care what that billboard says. If atheists want to promote their cause, I've got no problem with that. They've got every bit as much right to advance their cause as the many religions do. But, the name of the group "Omaha Coalition of Reason" would seem to imply that, non-members or people with beliefs that differ from theirs, do not use reason. It may not directly mock God or the religious but, there is that implication. Of course, the billboard is a lot more subtle in that regard than many of the atheists who comment here on HB. BTW- I do not take it as any type of insult or threat. It simply is what it is, a billboard for atheists and the OCOR.

[Husker_x]

At risk of starting yet another Religion Wars thread. . .

 

The answer you're going to get about the implication is, from the atheist perspective, in the form of another question: Which part of Christian doctrine do you consider reasonable? The virgin birth? The resurrection? The snake in the Garden of Eden? Turning water into wine? The existence of God?

 

This isn't really a cloak-and-dagger controversy. Of course atheists don't think religion is reasonable. If we did, we wouldn't be atheists. The claim also isn't that being religious makes you a wholly unreasonable person--only that on the subject of religion, there seems to have been a suspension of normal, daily reasoning faculties in favor of a scripture which tells tales of gods and magic and can't be demonstrated in any way by argument or evidence (e.g. reason). You can still believe that two and two make four or that gravity causes apples to fall to the ground. It's when you add the stuff about an invisible deity that no one can see or reliably interact with that the whole question of rationality comes into it.

[tschu]

Atheists don't even believe in God! Those silly people.

[bhamHusker]

Well I really don't care what that billboard says. If atheists want to promote their cause, I've got no problem with that. They've got every bit as much right to advance their cause as the many religions do. But, the name of the group "Omaha Coalition of Reason" would seem to imply that, non-members or people with beliefs that differ from theirs, do not use reason. It may not directly mock God or the religious but, there is that implication. Of course, the billboard is a lot more subtle in that regard than many of the atheists who comment here on HB. BTW- I do not take it as any type of insult or threat. It simply is what it is, a billboard for atheists and the OCOR.

I know this will invariably come across as offensive to the religious among you, but I don't think there's any other way to articulate this without stepping on your spiritual toes.

 

Would you consider a person that believes in unicorns and fairies to be at least partially lacking in reason? I know it's difficult for believers to accept, but many of us non-believers see belief in gods, devils, saints, angels, demons, miracles or magic to have the same legitimacy as belief in unicorns and fairies (none). I accept that many religious people are perfectly capable of applying reason to any number of facets of their lives, but when it comes to what is probably the most important aspect to the believer themselves, reason is abandoned in favor of mythology and superstition. Most atheists may not be so confrontational as to say that so bluntly, but right, wrong or otherwise, that's the fact of the matter. Some see giving undue deference to such nonsense as a waste of breath.

 

As for the bluntness with which some of us address this topic on this or other forums, I think that gives a false sense of how things are in the "real world." Here, the pace of discussion coupled with the relative anonymity results in all sides being more forthcoming and sometimes more confrontational than they might otherwise be. I know that's certainly true for myself with regards to this subject or with politics. I tend to be more diplomatic when conversations don't take hours to unfold and when we're looking each other in the eye.

[Yossarian]

I'm an atheist, but I see no reason to suggest that anyone who believe in God is an idiot. I do not compare them to people who believe in unicorns and fairies. The only time i have a problem with religious people is when the try to tell me that God is killing our soldiers in faraway places because we allow gay people to actually live. Or when they fly airplanes into buildings killing thousands of Americans (and others) because we do not follow the Koran. Or when they mutilate the genitals of women for religious reasons. Or when they harrass Katie Holmes. Yeah, that is crossing the line.

[bhamHusker]

At no point did I say that all atheists think the same way, just that many do. Also, I never said believers are idiots just because they believe, only that they've abandoned reason when it comes to that aspect of themselves. I'm curious about your position as an atheist. From your perspective, how are the mythologies of any of these religions any different than belief in unicorns or fairies?

 

As a side note, unicorns are probably a bad choice for an example on my part. Some Christians probably do believe in unicorns since the good ol' KJV talks about them.

[Husker_x]

And the other thing to point out is believers aren't exactly hiding this fact. When you ask a believer why he believes, inevitably you'll get som variation of the response, "It's my faith." If you have argument and evidence you don't need faith. If you have reasons (or reason), you don't need faith. If that weren't the case, any statement of fact on any subject could be construed as faith. "Barack Obama is president" would be a faith statement, and the word would cease to have any real meaning. Believers know that the things they profess to believe in are completely outside the normal framework of what we usually think of as reality. It's why we have the word in the first place.

[strigori]

Well I really don't care what that billboard says. If atheists want to promote their cause, I've got no problem with that. They've got every bit as much right to advance their cause as the many religions do. But, the name of the group "Omaha Coalition of Reason" would seem to imply that, non-members or people with beliefs that differ from theirs, do not use reason. It may not directly mock God or the religious but, there is that implication. Of course, the billboard is a lot more subtle in that regard than many of the atheists who comment here on HB. BTW- I do not take it as any type of insult or threat. It simply is what it is, a billboard for atheists and the OCOR.

 

There is a billboard on US 75 southbound, just past Fst that points to the reason why 'reason' is used for atheists. I wish I had a picture, but it says "In the beginning God created... For Truth" and then some phone number and website. And included is a representation of the ape to man progression with a red circle around it with a line drawn through the center.

 

Discounting science would count as a lack of reason to atheists, agnostics and even many religious people.

[JJ Husker]

At risk of starting yet another Religion Wars thread. . .

 

The answer you're going to get about the implication is, from the atheist perspective, in the form of another question: Which part of Christian doctrine do you consider reasonable? The virgin birth? The resurrection? The snake in the Garden of Eden? Turning water into wine? The existence of God?

 

This isn't really a cloak-and-dagger controversy. Of course atheists don't think religion is reasonable. If we did, we wouldn't be atheists. The claim also isn't that being religious makes you a wholly unreasonable person--only that on the subject of religion, there seems to have been a suspension of normal, daily reasoning faculties in favor of a scripture which tells tales of gods and magic and can't be demonstrated in any way by argument or evidence (e.g. reason). You can still believe that two and two make four or that gravity causes apples to fall to the ground. It's when you add the stuff about an invisible deity that no one can see or reliably interact with that the whole question of rationality comes into it.

 

Seems like a reasonable response (both yours and bham's after you). I'm not going to ridicule anyone who does not accept what I believe, especially when I cannot provide the definitive proof that most atheist/agnostic types request. However, I will not apologize for not being able to provide it. People are sure welcome to view it as abondoning or lacking reason but, I know it is not that simple. I simply accept some additional possibilities that ya'll don't. No harm, no foul, until either side starts forcing their beliefs (or lack thereof) on others. Too many times it seems like being exposed to those beliefs gets interpreted as them being forced onto the other group. That is never my intention.

[Yossarian]

At no point did I say that all atheists think the same way, just that many do. Also, I never said believers are idiots just because they believe, only that they've abandoned reason when it comes to that aspect of themselves. I'm curious about your position as an atheist. From your perspective, how are the mythologies of any of these religions any different than belief in unicorns or fairies?

 

As a side note, unicorns are probably a bad choice for an example on my part. Some Christians probably do believe in unicorns since the good ol' KJV talks about them.

 

I was not quoting you. In fact, I was not quoting anyone. Were you quoting me?

 

And I am not disappointed that there are people who believe you should not kill, steal, or covet your neighbor's wife. Hey, come to think about it, I believe some of the same stuff. And many of my friends are religious - I do not attack their faith, and I certainly don't think they are idiots.

 

As for explaining mythologies, I don't do that. I don't believe. I do believe in the 1st Amendment (and the others as well).

[Husker_x]

At risk of starting yet another Religion Wars thread. . .

 

The answer you're going to get about the implication is, from the atheist perspective, in the form of another question: Which part of Christian doctrine do you consider reasonable? The virgin birth? The resurrection? The snake in the Garden of Eden? Turning water into wine? The existence of God?

 

This isn't really a cloak-and-dagger controversy. Of course atheists don't think religion is reasonable. If we did, we wouldn't be atheists. The claim also isn't that being religious makes you a wholly unreasonable person--only that on the subject of religion, there seems to have been a suspension of normal, daily reasoning faculties in favor of a scripture which tells tales of gods and magic and can't be demonstrated in any way by argument or evidence (e.g. reason). You can still believe that two and two make four or that gravity causes apples to fall to the ground. It's when you add the stuff about an invisible deity that no one can see or reliably interact with that the whole question of rationality comes into it.

 

Seems like a reasonable response (both yours and bham's after you). I'm not going to ridicule anyone who does not accept what I believe, especially when I cannot provide the definitive proof that most atheist/agnostic types request. However, I will not apologize for not being able to provide it. People are sure welcome to view it as abondoning or lacking reason but, I know it is not that simple. I simply accept some additional possibilities that ya'll don't. No harm, no foul, until either side starts forcing their beliefs (or lack thereof) on others. Too many times it seems like being exposed to those beliefs gets interpreted as them being forced onto the other group. That is never my intention.

 

Agreed. We've got enough jihad in the world already. That being said you should feel free to post whatever you like if you want to have a conversation about it. If not, totally fine.

[bhamHusker]

I was not quoting you. In fact, I was not quoting anyone. Were you quoting me?

 

And I am not disappointed that there are people who believe you should not kill, steal, or covet your neighbor's wife. Hey, come to think about it, I believe some of the same stuff. And many of my friends are religious - I do not attack their faith, and I certainly don't think they are idiots.

 

As for explaining mythologies, I don't do that. I don't believe. I do believe in the 1st Amendment (and the others as well).

You didn't quote me, but you did reference my post directly since I'm the only one that mentioned unicorns and fairies. It's reasonable to infer that your post was, at least in part, a response to my own. Thus, I thought a clarification was in order. Also, I didn't ask you to explain a mythology. I asked you to explain the reasoning behind your statement that religious belief isn't, in your opinion, comparable to belief in unicorns or fairies. If you don't want to answer that, or are unable to answer that question, that's fine too. It's just a small matter of curiosity on my part.

[JJ Husker]

My two cents on why I think unicorns and fairies are in a different boat than religious faith and beliefs. If unicorns and fairies existed, it would be possible and therefore highly likely that evidence of their existence would be documented. Unicorn horn remnants, video, whatnot and etc. The very nature of most faith based religious beliefs eliminates the possibility of scientific evidence. In my mind, that puts them in separate catagories. I understand the tendency of a non-believer to treat them the same but when, by the very nature of faith based beliefs, it is impossible to provide typical means of proof, it seems to me to be somewhat self serving and illogical to demand such proof. If that is what it takes for a non-believer to come to believe, fine but I think it a bit out of line to require it to accept that others believe it.

 

I do not want to broach this part of the conversation yet again but, I still have not seen any scientific evidence that is not congruant with my religous beliefs. What am I missing? The go to here is evolution vs creation. I see no reason they cannot or do not coexist. I really am curious about what hard evidence anyone thinks exists that should preclude me having the religous beliefs I do. I've requested this numerous times and still nobody has provided the answer.

[zoogs]

Not if they were heavenly, immortal beings. Certainly you don't expect fairies to be lying around dead somewhere. They live in the clouds and only come down when kids lose their teeth. Everyone knows that!

 

A more direct example might be let's say, Zeus.

 

Anyway the important thing is to champion reason and to champion science, which does not have to conflict with one's religious beliefs. How a religious person reconciles it I don't know. I don't think it is productive at all for an atheist group to snidely suggest that to be religious is to mean exclusion from the proponents of reason.

 

I have a somewhat similar reaction when religious people tout themselves as seekers and/or knowers of The Truth.