Religion

Humanist_Activist

(7,670 posts)

48. Ken Ham's messages are purposely personal, directed at atheists as people...

Tue Oct 8, 2013, 12:04 AM

Oct 2013

most of the atheist ones you mention are impersonal or reach out to atheists who live in areas that are, frankly, hostile to their very existence.

I don't see the equivalency here, nor a "tit for tat".

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

84 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Anti-atheism billboards in Times Square and San Francisco [View all] pokerfan Oct 2013 OP

That's Ken Ham's group. He'a a young earth creationist. rug Oct 2013 #1

That explains a lot. cbayer Oct 2013 #12

More from the silly believers in mythology... Cooley Hurd Oct 2013 #2

Genesis = Ignorance. Dawson Leery Oct 2013 #3

That's so freaking offensive. cbayer Oct 2013 #4

no more offensive than these... codemoguy Oct 2013 #5

Those are offensive as well. cbayer Oct 2013 #9

I can't consider saying 'I'm right and you're wrong' an attack... codemoguy Oct 2013 #13

That's been standard practice in this forum for a long time skepticscott Oct 2013 #15

Like this? rug Oct 2013 #17

Offensive?? I think not. longship Oct 2013 #22

I should have been clearer and made a distinction. cbayer Oct 2013 #23

The point of FFRF, American Atheists, etc. is to reach out. longship Oct 2013 #29

They weren't all "outreach", longship. cbayer Oct 2013 #30

It is all outreach. And ALL free speech. longship Oct 2013 #32

Are you making the case that anyone should be able to say anything they want cbayer Oct 2013 #35

Well, that's what the First Amendment says. longship Oct 2013 #41

I think we are on the same page here honestly. cbayer Oct 2013 #42

Me too you, cbayer. longship Oct 2013 #43

You have also taught me a lot, longship. cbayer Oct 2013 #44

They are offensive Politicalboi Oct 2013 #53

It's childish tit-for-tat. It's in response to billboards like these: Common Sense Party Oct 2013 #6

Uh, no skepticscott Oct 2013 #10

Uh, yes. It's simply designed to needle those who believe in "mythology", etc. Common Sense Party Oct 2013 #14

"Simply designed to needle"? Did you even read them? skepticscott Oct 2013 #18

Yes, I did. Did you? Common Sense Party Oct 2013 #21

If you actually did read them skepticscott Oct 2013 #34

Do you believe that ALL dogma is inherently dangerous? Common Sense Party Oct 2013 #46

I thought that was a given for any reasonable person to conclude... Humanist_Activist Oct 2013 #47

Dogma isn't always unquestioned. Common Sense Party Oct 2013 #49

Actually, the link you link to supports my premise... Humanist_Activist Oct 2013 #52

Post removed Post removed Oct 2013 #72

Exactly. You put it so much more eloquently and maturely than I did. cbayer Oct 2013 #11

Ken Ham's messages are purposely personal, directed at atheists as people... Humanist_Activist Oct 2013 #48

Very often, people see what they want or expect to see. Common Sense Party Oct 2013 #50

Ken Ham makes a rather clear message, that atheists are wrong... Humanist_Activist Oct 2013 #54

They're expressing their deeply held beliefs skepticscott Oct 2013 #7

The unmeant point WovenGems Oct 2013 #57

Because there are no simple answers. cbayer Oct 2013 #58

And... WovenGems Oct 2013 #59

"I don't know" is a pretty simple answer Fumesucker Oct 2013 #71

As an Atheist, I see nothing wrong with this Shadowflash Oct 2013 #8

"we have the message of truth the world needs to hear xfundy Oct 2013 #16

I'd be surprised to learn OriginalGeek Oct 2013 #19

Good one. Calling them "friends" is one of the things that makes this offensive. cbayer Oct 2013 #20

Yep OriginalGeek Oct 2013 #25

It's an unnecessary and passive aggressive Dorian Gray Oct 2013 #24

The answers are in Genesis. dimbear Oct 2013 #26

I would counter with. You better hope Athiests are right, if not you're probably going to hell notadmblnd Oct 2013 #27

*shrug* I invite them to prove it. Deep13 Oct 2013 #28

The problem for me is that this is a war that just doesn't have a purpose. cbayer Oct 2013 #31

A war? Deep13 Oct 2013 #33

There is absolutely no point in a battle between theism and atheism, imo. cbayer Oct 2013 #36

No, but a lively discussion would be good. nt Deep13 Oct 2013 #38

We have those all the time, Deep. cbayer Oct 2013 #39

So this isn't enough of a reason for you? skepticscott Oct 2013 #40

Except of course, some are trying to legislate based on various theistic beliefs, which cannot be AtheistCrusader Oct 2013 #55

The religious right is trying to do that, but not theists in general. cbayer Oct 2013 #56

Battling with the religious right is indeed what needs to be done! trotsky Oct 2013 #60

Why not? Leontius Oct 2013 #61

How does one legislate religious-inspired morality that is inclusive and permissible under the 1st AtheistCrusader Oct 2013 #63

And what you want is more valid or important than what they want, because? Leontius Oct 2013 #64

Because it's BASED ON REALITY and testable, provable science. AtheistCrusader Oct 2013 #65

A free society implies that ideas all have the same chance of approval or disapproval Leontius Oct 2013 #68

You are correct, I personally, do not. AtheistCrusader Oct 2013 #70

I'm not talking about the exact wording of a law. I'm talking about the motivation of the Leontius Oct 2013 #73

There is usually significant overlap between the motivation, and the material fact of the proposed AtheistCrusader Oct 2013 #75

Your own example is one. If I were to be opposed to abortion based on your example of defending a Leontius Oct 2013 #76

How would you meet the secular demand of invoking 'rights' for a multi-celled blastocyst that hasn't AtheistCrusader Oct 2013 #77

Pre-implantation equals no current pregnancy hence no potential for a medical abortion. Leontius Oct 2013 #78

Your statement on a unimplanted but fertilized ovum is at odds with that of the religious right. AtheistCrusader Oct 2013 #79

Yes, we know how much skepticscott Oct 2013 #37

This thread cuts to the core of what the atheist billboards are about. longship Oct 2013 #45

The problem is some people look so hard to be insulted, provoked, excluded, attacked and persecuted Leontius Oct 2013 #62

Well, you said it all much more succinctly. longship Oct 2013 #66

You've perfectly described skepticscott Oct 2013 #67

I have unfortunately described a far to large group of people in this country. Leontius Oct 2013 #69

What group is that? Why are they "too large" and how do you propose shrinking thier numbers? n/t Humanist_Activist Oct 2013 #82

Wow, you perfectly summed up the majority of Christians in this country. n/t Humanist_Activist Oct 2013 #81

All I can say is Politicalboi Oct 2013 #51

Apparently these were put up in response to the billboards that were put up last fall/winter cbayer Oct 2013 #74

Spend, spend, spend Corey Oct 2013 #80

Said this in the other thread LostOne4Ever Oct 2013 #83

Who would want to celebrate edhopper Oct 2013 #84