Page 23 of 62 FirstFirst ... 13212223242533 ... LastLast
Results 221 to 230 of 611

Thread: Atheist Action Halts Calif. Nativity Display; Churches Go to Court

  1. #221
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,964

    Re: Atheist Action Halts Calif. Nativity Display; Churches Go to Court

    Quote Originally Posted by rocket88 View Post
    That's fine, you're free to call them dicks when they're being dicks which they clearly were. You are not, however, free to vandalize their property and then cry when the city decides not to give you the opportunity anymore.
    I agree regarding the vandalizing. Also a dickish move...as I've suggested.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Similar, the dolts vandalizeing the Athiest signs make those against the athiests actions look dumb.
    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    And those pulling down a pentagram are in the wrong as well. Vandalism of someone else's stuff is wrong, regardless of their reasons.
    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Those who vandalized them are adolescent buffoons who should be ashamed of themselves.
    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Attempting to hinder, by putting up non-topical, if not directly adversarial displays, or prohibit, by attempting to get a specific display banned/entire celebration banned, the presence or practice of utilizing public ground to celebrate the holiday seasons is by definition not showing "tolerance".

    (note...neither is vandalizing displays of others, especially those that are being tolerant and acting in accordance to the activities theme)
    That said, not everyone whose "crying" that the city isn't giving them an oppertunity anymore are the ones that vandalized it. I agree though, those who are JUST blaming the athiest groups for causing the holiday decorations to no longer be allowed don't have much ground to stand on for their complaints.

    However, those just blaming "thiests" also don't have much ground.

    You had a place allowing for the public to put up HOLIDAY celebration displays on public property and had been doing so for many years. You had a group rallying others of like mind to purposefully attempt to hinder and disrupt said celebration by gaining spots and placing up things that not only had nothing to do with a holiday celebration, but were meant to be outright hostile and/or antagonistic to the various religious AND NON RELIGIOUS celebrations occuring there. Not shockingly, this dick moved inspired others to do escalating dickish things such as vandalizing them. While that doesn't excuse the vandals actions, it does play a part in it. They turned the situation into an antagonistic one in the first place, and then the other side raised the stakes, and ultimately the whole thing got shut down because two sides of adults decided they wanted to act like ****ing children.

    The Facts....

    The space and property and program had been used for years for the purpose of putting up holiday decorations for the public to enjoy on public land.
    Athiest groups attempted to gain multiple plots used for these decorations and proceeded to put up a number of decorations pertaining in no way to any winter holiday and often times specifically antagonistic to those celebrating those holidays
    Some of those displays were than vandalized by people
    The city government ordered the removal of all the displays

    It was a dick move to purposefully attempt to turn an area of holiday celebration into an antagonistic battle front of church vs state and faith vs reason
    It was a dick, and illegla, move to vandalize those decorations
    It was a sad but understandable action by the government to end the whole thing because two sides acted like bloody 3 year olds and the city government had to act like the parent taking the toy away from the kids.

    Athiests did nothing to the nativity display...they did do something however to the general holiday celebration, specifically they attempted to turn it into an ideological battle ground rather than an area of holiday celebration.

  2. #222
    Professor cmakaioz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Oakland, CA
    Last Seen
    01-22-13 @ 02:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    1,582

    Re: Atheist Action Halts Calif. Nativity Display; Churches Go to Court

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    I see no hate in saying "happy holidays" at a place that is purpoesfully meant to be for holiday decorations
    However I do feel there is a certain amount of hate involved in terms of signs declaring Santa a myth or degrading the notion of religion at a place that is purpoesfully meant to be for holiday decorations.
    Your basic mistake is that you are privileging religious displays as having some kind of superior claim to "holidays" over nonreligious ones.

    Legally AND ethically speaking, they don't.

    The notion that it is hateful to promote the value of accuracy is rather peculiar.

    I often see people push the notion that it is cruel to let small children know there is no Santa Claus. I take the opposite stance; I find it cruel and rather transparently manipulative and selfish to deceive children into belief in Santa Claus for the sake of effectively bribing them into decent behavior through promise of material gain.

    Albeit with a wider range of bells and whistles, I see theism and many forms of religion in the same light. I can point to all manner of atrocities, crimes, deceptions, and barbaric practices anchored in full or in part to different flavors of theistic religious doctrines, but I'm hard pressed to think of any clear examples of harm genuinely traceable to insistence upon accuracy and transparency.

    In any case, as I pointed out to Chaddelamancha, if it is a "dick move" for a display expressing or urging a contrary view to be present, then logically this would mean it's every bit as much a "dick move" on the part of the folks promoting the nativity display to have a display knowing that there will be other displays present. This, I should hope, is clearly seen as a silly conclusion.

    The mere presence of contrary views is not dickish or mean or cruel. Instead, it is the unwarranted sense of entitlement on the part of those whose dogmas have gone unchallenged for a long time (for example, for 60+ years) in their *privileged* used of a public space...which has led to them developing a collective glass ego.

    Going out of your way to try and gather up as many people as possible to purposefully grab as many of the spots as you can, in hopes of hindering others from having a chance to put up holiday decorations, and then to put up signs that have nothing to do with celebrating the holidays at all but rather do nothing but criticize religion and/or outright working to specifically and purposefully spoil peoples holiday seasons is, if not "hateful", completely and utterly dickish.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    As said numerous times before...people are free to be dicks

    And I'm free to call them colossal flaming dicks
    Yes to both...just as I'm free to point out what a glaring case of hypocrisy it is in your part to privilege the religious displays in that manner.

    The unreasonable expectation on the part of the nativity display group -- in which they got used to having no contrary views presented -- led to an unwarranted sense of entitlement to what was a public space. This is a common phenomenon, but that doesn't make it any less mistaken.

    Returning to my bus analogy, the public display space no more belongs to the nativity group (or ANY group) than a random bus seat (which a commuter usually gets five days a week). The expectation of possession --which includes the unwarranted expectation that just because they've had free reign for X amount of time, they should continue to have free reign -- is a mistake on the part of the nativity group.
    Last edited by cmakaioz; 11-21-12 at 02:51 PM.
    I've moved on to a better forum (scienceforums.net). Facts matter, and I don't have the time or energy for putting up with the pretense that they don't. PM me if you'd like me to get in touch with you when I'm done developing my own forum system, likely towards the end of 2013.

  3. #223
    King Of The Dog Pound
    Black Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    34,513

    Re: Atheist Action Halts Calif. Nativity Display; Churches Go to Court

    Quote Originally Posted by Verthaine View Post
    Exactly how are "both parties to blame" for exercising their Constitutional rights?
    My statement as I have already pointed out has absolutely nothing to do with law or constitutional rights.

    Quote Originally Posted by Verthaine View Post
    There is no evidence to suggest the vandal(s)s (whoever they may be) were forced to commit the criminal acts in question.It is the vandal(s),and they alone,who are to blame.
    This may be the case but it does not excuse the stupidity of making fun of religion on the holidays for no other reason than to be insulting.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    Benjii likes the protests...he'd be largely irrelevant without them. So he needs to speak where he knows there will be protests against him and that makes him responsible for the protests.
    Quote Originally Posted by Absentglare View Post
    You can successfully wipe your ass with toilet paper, that doesn't mean that you should.

  4. #224
    Professor cmakaioz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Oakland, CA
    Last Seen
    01-22-13 @ 02:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    1,582

    Re: Atheist Action Halts Calif. Nativity Display; Churches Go to Court

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Athiests did nothing to the nativity display...they did do something however to the general holiday celebration, specifically they attempted to turn it into an ideological battle ground rather than an area of holiday celebration.
    Wrong. It was already an ideological battle ground. One side -- the privileged one -- was just used to encountering no resistance.

    This is the exact same mistake as made by those who falsely claim that attempts to raise taxes on the rich are "starting" a class war. No...they're not starting a class war; they are participating in class warfare that's already built into the system imposed upon them. The rich have been and continue to be engaged in class war, but they usually don't run into any kind of significant resistance.
    I've moved on to a better forum (scienceforums.net). Facts matter, and I don't have the time or energy for putting up with the pretense that they don't. PM me if you'd like me to get in touch with you when I'm done developing my own forum system, likely towards the end of 2013.

  5. #225
    King Of The Dog Pound
    Black Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    34,513

    Re: Atheist Action Halts Calif. Nativity Display; Churches Go to Court

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    but a distinction begs to be made
    only those who vandalized the atheists' exhibits engaged in illicit behavior
    My argument or statement has nothing to do with the legal or illegal nature of the vandalism, nothing at all. It has to do with a mean spirited and tasteless attack on religion for no other purpose than to insult a belittle, as well as the vandalism being a similar act.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    Benjii likes the protests...he'd be largely irrelevant without them. So he needs to speak where he knows there will be protests against him and that makes him responsible for the protests.
    Quote Originally Posted by Absentglare View Post
    You can successfully wipe your ass with toilet paper, that doesn't mean that you should.

  6. #226
    Mod Conspiracy Theorist
    rocket88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    A very blue state
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,140

    Re: Atheist Action Halts Calif. Nativity Display; Churches Go to Court

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    It was a sad but understandable action by the government to end the whole thing because two sides acted like bloody 3 year olds and the city government had to act like the parent taking the toy away from the kids.

    Athiests did nothing to the nativity display...they did do something however to the general holiday celebration, specifically they attempted to turn it into an ideological battle ground rather than an area of holiday celebration.
    It is sad that the government had to act as they did. Now there's a court case because the government isn't endorsing one side or the other? The churches don't have a "right" to use that property. It was a privilege that was revoked because of some childish assholes.


    Quote Originally Posted by Jetboogieman View Post
    This issue has been plowed more times than Paris Hilton.
    Quote Originally Posted by Oborosen View Post
    Too bad we have to observe human rights.

  7. #227
    Guru
    Verthaine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    09-08-16 @ 02:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,044

    Re: Atheist Action Halts Calif. Nativity Display; Churches Go to Court

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackdog View Post
    My statement as I have already pointed out has absolutely nothing to do with law or constitutional rights.
    True,It has to do on your opinion of the subject.Which of course is well within your right to have,but I hope you do understand that Constitutionality trumps your personal opinion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackdog View Post

    This maybe the case but it does not excuse the stupidity of making fun of religion on the holidays for no other reason than to be insulting.
    Doesn't give anyone the right to commit vandalism. Doesn't matter why the vandals did it.They still committed a crime,

    That's the price we pay for living in a free country. Stupidity and being insulting isn't a crime. Vandalism,on the other hand,is.

  8. #228
    King Of The Dog Pound
    Black Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    34,513

    Re: Atheist Action Halts Calif. Nativity Display; Churches Go to Court

    Quote Originally Posted by Verthaine View Post
    True,It has to do on your opinion of the subject.Which of course is well within your right to have,but I hope you do understand that Constitutionality trumps your personal opinion.
    Since the Constitution and laws can be changed, no it does not.

    Quote Originally Posted by Verthaine View Post
    Doesn't give anyone the right to commit vandalism. Doesn't matter why the vandals did it.They still committed a crime,
    I never said it did. As for the rest, so what? Makes it no less ignorant.

    Quote Originally Posted by Verthaine View Post
    That's the price we pay for living in a free country. Stupidity and being insulting isn't a crime. Vandalism,on the other hand,is.
    Again so what? Has nothing to do with anything I said.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    Benjii likes the protests...he'd be largely irrelevant without them. So he needs to speak where he knows there will be protests against him and that makes him responsible for the protests.
    Quote Originally Posted by Absentglare View Post
    You can successfully wipe your ass with toilet paper, that doesn't mean that you should.

  9. #229
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,964

    Re: Atheist Action Halts Calif. Nativity Display; Churches Go to Court

    Quote Originally Posted by cmakaioz View Post
    Your basic mistake is that you are privileging religious displays as having some kind of superior claim to "holidays" over nonreligious ones.
    Not at all. But nice job making assumptions based on your own prejudices, one of which seems to be your assumption that because I think the athiests were acting like dicks in this case that I must somehow be biased towards the religious.

    Religious people don't have a superior claim to "holidays" in general. I don't think any religion, for example, has any kind of privledge or superiority over Santa or Rudolph or Frosty. I don't particularly think there's any religion having a privledge over Kwanzaa. And I don't think there's any privledge of christians and the religious side of Christmas over Jews and Haunakkah or others that simply wish to celebrate the Solstace.

    But I do think that if its deemed there's a public interest to have a public celebration of the holiday season on public land, that its reasonable and tactful to expect that those seeking to use said grounds in such instances are going to CELEBRATE A HOLIDAY.

    If you simply just don't think holidays are worth celebrating, or don't like some holidays, that's fine...then voice your displeasure to your government or protet by not visiting the decorations. However, if you go out of your way to antagonize, disrupt, insult, belittle, or degrade another individuals holiday celebration at such a place than yes...DICK move.

    Mind you, that's not just athiests. If someone had a decoration of the baby jesus blowing out a Menorah...Dick Move. If someone had Santa Claus ****ting upon a Kwanzaa mat...dick move. If someone had a bunch of people with pentagons dancing around a fir tree with Santa being burned upon it...dick move. It's not about religion or not. It's about purposefully commendeering the spot to specifically and purposefully place up a display antagonistic to the purpose of the event in the first place, and doubly so when its specifically belittling and antagonistic towards another individuals holiday celebrations.

    This is why I had no issue with "reasoned greetings" or "happy holidays" or "happy solstace" but had issue with the one depicting Santa and jesus and declaring them Myths or signs simply belittling the following of religions.

    I often see people push the notion that it is cruel to let small children know there is no Santa Claus. I take the opposite stance; I find it cruel and rather transparently manipulative and selfish to deceive children into belief in Santa Claus for the sake of effectively bribing them into decent behavior through promise of material gain.
    And good for you feeling that way. I hope you raise your children in such a fashion. However, I would hope you'd have the common sense to understand the vast majority of people don't feel the same way as you and have the tactful respect for your fellow citizens to not commandeer an area meant for a celebration of the holidays to forcefully interject your views in a way to SPECIFICALLY condemn or belittle the other persons holiday views. If you don't feel that way...cool deal, more power to you, but understand I'd feel you're acting like a dick if you acted upon it.

    In any case, as I pointed out to Chaddelamancha, if it is a "dick move" for a display expressing or urging a contrary view to be present, then logically this would mean it's every bit as much a "dick move" on the part of the folks promoting the nativity display to have a display knowing that there will be other displays present. This, I should hope, is clearly seen as a silly conclusion.
    The only sillyness I see ir your arguments.

    Posting a nativity is a postiive expression of ones own faith not specificially, in any fashion, making reference or being aimed at any other holiday celebration.

    Posting a picture of Santa Claus and declaring it a myth is both a positive expression of ones own beliefs (that myths should be called out apparently), while at the same time is a negative expression AGAINST another persons beliefs regarding the celebration of the holidays. It is an action specifically being aimed at another persons views and celebrations and aimed in a negative and antagonistic way.

    Yes, there is a DISTINCT difference between those. People "offended" by an athiest putting up a Santa Claus with "reasoned greetings" on his hat and perhaps a phrase of something like "The real meaning of Christmas is togetherness and family" would be idiotic. People "offended" by an Christian showing a manger scene with a sign going "He is who we should celebrate, not some red faced false idol with a beard" would be reasonable imho, because it's going out of its way to specifically belittle another persons holiday celebration.

    The mere presence of contrary views is not dickish or mean or cruel.
    My issue is not contrary views (though this highlights my point so well as you indicate PRECISELY my meaning about their attempts to turn something meant to be a celebratoin of the holidays into an ideological battle ground). My issue is purposefully targetted antagonistic views being placed in a locatoin they have no tactful basis for being in.

    Yes to both...just as I'm free to point out what a glaring case of hypocrisy it is in your part to privilege the religious displays in that manner.
    And you highlight again your own prejudice and bigotry by stereotyping me and using those stereotypes to leap to conclussions. No where was I advocating specifically for privlege to "religious displays" or any such things. Indeed, I've routinely stated a similar style of actoin by religious folks would ALSO be dickish and wrong and I've also advocated support for completely non-religious displays that are celebrating the holidays. My argument has nothing to do with "religious privledge" but due to your bigotry against religious folks you stereotype me as believing or arguing in favor of a certain thing simply because I disagree with you in terms of the actions of the athiests in this case.

  10. #230
    Guru
    Verthaine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    09-08-16 @ 02:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,044

    Re: Atheist Action Halts Calif. Nativity Display; Churches Go to Court

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackdog View Post
    Since the Constitution and laws can be changed, no it does not.
    Good luck with that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackdog View Post
    I never said it did. As for the rest, so what? Makes it no less ignorant.
    Yes it is ignorant,so what?
    Ignorance isn't a crime.
    Vandalism is.
    What the atheists put up isn't the issue.
    The crime that was committed is.

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackdog View Post
    Again so what? Has nothing to do with anything I said.
    You mean something like what you stated on post #225...
    [quote=Blackdog]
    It has to do with a mean spirited and tasteless attack on religion for no other purpose than to insult a belittle, as well as the vandalism being a similar act.

    But the thing is,it isn't a similar act.One is legal (free speech) and the other isn't (vandalism).
    We get it,you don't like what the atheists put up.
    It is your right to have that opinion.
    So what are you suggesting be done about it,if anything?

Page 23 of 62 FirstFirst ... 13212223242533 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •