Atheists that claim they are tolerant explain this

Post Reply New Topic

Well, I guess I am going to hold judgment until I find an actual map/layout of the place instead of someone seeing a small area on a television screen in Australia. I'll look for that when I can.

That is not what I said. In fact, my response to your assertion is alternatively framing the challenge I gave Inuyasha (which he has not answered) and really anyone else if they want to answer. I'll repeat it:



That is your argument. Your argument is the sign should not be shown because you find it offensive, and Inuyasha finds it inflammatory. Your Supreme Court decisions show whether or not the creche should stand, not the option of showing the FFRF sign. I said very explicitly that if you were going to allow the creche to allow the sign, or the alternate option is to do neither. I never once said this was a plan to get their message out. I hope you just did not use the wrong sentence structure.



Including the Westboro Baptist case? That was Roberts's court there. In fact, what does Inuyasha think about that case, too? If he actually chooses to answer one of my questions for once, which I remind people they are not obliged to do. I'll only say it once and I'm done.

You do that. I will go with the Courthouse's Attorney. If someone wants to claim that x is unconstitutional the burden of proof is on them. I am fine with the footage, precedent, the statement from the County Judge and the Court Attorney.



Sorry, but this borders on a strawman. My argument was that the city was under no obligation to display the sign (I also went into more detail on the previous pages). Please note, I said, anti-Christian not 'offensive', they are not the same thing I am not arguing that it should be banned because it is offensive. Further, the banner is an explicit endorsement of an anti-Christian message. The endorsement test has a legal opposite in which the government cannot disapprove of religion, the nativity sits within a seasonal display and can be interpreted to be a part of it. The atheist banner is just a blatant dis-endorsement placard. I am open minded as to whether it would fail the test, I think it probably would though. My primary points are that the city does not have to show the banner and that the display does not violate the First Amendment.



Free speech does include a freedom to insult, I would argue that someone, such cases, ought not to exercise that freedom but that is another question. I note again, I have not said the banner should be banned because it is offensive, rather that the city has no obligation to display it.

I agree that free speech does not guarantee a right to an audience.

However, I'm pretty sure the atheists in question would be satisfied if the christian displays were removed from government property.

However that is simply going after one religion and is rather discriminatory because there is nothing on the Christian nativity scene bashing Judaism, Islam, or anyone else.

BS


"No religious" is clear. It does not say "No Christian"

Besides of the part that claims that baby Jesus is god and therefore Judaism, Islam and everyone else are wrong. Bonus points because it also bashes Jehova witnesses and their anti-christmas belief.

Except for the fact that there was no actually text on the nativity scene making that claim.


How about the atheists go make the same lawsuits to Muslim religious symbols and then let's see what happens...

I have a hard time thinking that by your reckoning that this is not an anti-Christian or anti-religious message. Dan Barker, from the FFRF said he that it is 'an Anti-Christian message' (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKvA-9abh2E about 3:10 into the video).

Last edited by 91 on 13 Dec 2011, 11:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I am unsurprised by your inability to understand the written word. In fact, it surprises me more that you are literate at all.

My post was clearly about Inuyasha's claim that the FFRF's letter (because it was just that, a letter, not a lawsuit or a threat or anything) targetted Christian symbols solely. Whilst the bit I quoted clearly asks for the removal of any religious symbol. In other words: No, it is not part of a conspiracy that focus exclusively on Christians. It is like you say "anti-religious" (Or rather against government endorsement of religions).

---
Oh yes, there was no text. But there was an angel blessing the baby. Clear indication of divinity.

Also, I have noticed that there is a lot of BS surrounding your reporting of the facts here. Actually, rather than BS an urge to blend different cases together into a single case.

Let us focus on the specific case for Henderson county:

http://www.malakoffnews.net/2011/12/06/ ... -nativity/
Inuyasha has constantly and ad nauseum said that there are other religious symbols in the scene but the article actually does not say that.

In other words, in the case of Hendenson County, there actually is only a Christian nativity scene.

The submitted Atheist "banner" / Group shot is for the case from Ellwood.

We have been victims to Fox News style reporting from Inuyasha.

@ Vexcalibur

I'm sure if a Jewish group that lived in that community wanted to put up Jewish symbols, they would have been more than willing to accomodate that.

Furthermore, I never said that the banner was the incident occurring in Texas, you jumped to a conclusion.

I was talking about two different situations to show a pattern. The case in Texas involves throwing the Flying Spagetti Monster in with the Nativity scene.

The other incident is an attempt to put a banner right over or on the nativity scene.

Sorry if you couldn't figure out the fact I was referring to more than one incident, I think 91 actually knew I was talking about more than one incident in this thread.

I am sure that since you have no evidence for that, you are once again talking out of your ass.


Oh hell yes, cause a confusion by pumping off topic cases to the discussion and then blame the people that got confused.

You mean poison the well.


And what's exactly the grounds for not allowing it? The FSM involves no text. It is a religion with plenty of adepts. The founder of the church is against being anti-Christian and also against the FFRF anti-nativity scenes actions.


You keep being a dishonest weasel and a shame for the race of frozen vegetables. It is not a banner, it is a group shot with text in the lower part.



But how convenient. You left that out whenever you mentioned how religious symbols from other religions where admitted. All this time you forgot to mention that in the original OP. The Christian nativity scene is the sole display. Every time you said that the FFRF were unjoustly focusing only on Christian the nativity scene, you forgot this bit of information, that in that one county it was really the only scene. And in the angry anti-Christmas letter from the FFRF they were completely right. As 91 has posted multiple times, Supreme Court does not allow the Christian nativity scene to be the only display.

This thread is a festival of Inuyasha prickiness, intolerance against atheists and downward dishonest reporting. My god, in a way it is beautiful.

Nonsense. The concept that Jesus Christ is the living son of God was, and is, very offensive to observant jews. Many have died in the arguments over that point.

It's their business not to get upset over it now, but they have every right to demand a menorah on the same site.

And don't get me started on what Muslims think of the whole concept of Christ's nativity.

What about the views of Jehovas' Witnesses? I find those guys very annoying but they have a problem with any holiday celebration.

Which I'm sure they would be allowed to.



Except Muslims view Jesus as one of the prophets...



Best way to get a Jehovas' Witness to leave you alone is to say you're a Mormon and they run off and never bother you again.

Anyways, should we not celebrate 4th of July because of Jehova Witnesses demand it not be celebrated...

So a menorah is ok. What if the freedom from religion guys come up with a symbol? Can they display that?

I mean personally I'm not a joiner but if someone who doesn't believe in a god still feels the need to be part of a group and go to meetings and whatnot, hey, whatever.



Best way to get a Jehovas' Witness to leave you alone is to say you're a Mormon and they run off and never bother you again.

Anyways, should we not celebrate 4th of July because of Jehova Witnesses demand it not be celebrated...[/quote]

As a lifelong resident of Utah i can assure you that telling them you are Mormon doesn't work that well.

Personally I just get them to confirm their concept of the elect and the estimated size of their church and then ask them why i should favor a religion that gives me such poor odds.

I suspect that the JW's would prefer that we not spend tax dollars celebrating the 4th of july, and they do have a point.

If you want to talk specifically about Henderson County, they have said they are open to putting up more displays.



You were the one that posted the information from the Ellwood City case. You put up the banner and asked how it could be refused. We responded based on that case. HerrGrimm asked a specific question about the layout of the Texas display and so the conservation changed back. Now you are claiming that Inuyasha is confusing everything, he is not, you are.



In the Texas case the atheists originally wanted the nativity withdrawn from the display. Now they want their banner put up. As far as I am aware, the county has not so far refused to put it up; only stating, that the nativity is not going anywhere. http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2011/12/09/athe ... s-display/
Remember that it was in Ellwood, where the authorities refused to put up the atheist banner.



Maybe, they do have that 'A' pin. That however, would be up to the relevant city to work out.



A good deal of these displays do have a Menorah on them. In the Ellwood case where the atheist banner was refused, there was a menorah on the site. The problem is and we have been over this, many times, is that the government is not obliged to accept all displays.

An "A" Pin eh? Not sure the atheists would go for that. To the Muslims Allah is gods name. To the Jews, Aleph (א) is the first letter in gods name. Not sure the Atheists would walk around with the symbol for God pinned to their shirts as recognized by many biblical religions. But I do think I don't want this post read by too many atheists because of their lack of general knowledge, it would amuse me greatly to see an Atheist walking around with God's name pinned next to their heart.

I was referring to the 'A' pin worn by many senior atheists and used by many of their organizations.