• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

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

Dittohead not! said:
Touchdown.,... Christians!

yaaaaaay!

Waronchristmas bowl: Christians 7, Atheists, 0.
Click to expand...

It seems to me that the touchdown got called back for an illegal play and in the process the Christians lost 15 yards
 
lpast said:
Im not an overly religious person...I dont go to church and I dont push religion on anyone else...I find atheists repugnant...and I find them so because they try to force what they want down everyones throat while whining incessantly that religion is doing it to them...you dont like nativity scenes...then dont friggin look at them..
Click to expand...

If you don't like atheist signs, don't read them.

BTW What is "not overly religious"? Does that mean you're a christian but don't shoot abortion doctors?
 
spanky said:
If you don't like atheist signs, don't read them.

BTW What is "not overly religious"? Does that mean you're a christian but don't shoot abortion doctors?
Click to expand...

Ill tell you whats not overly religious...a nativity scene...and I was not complaining about atheist signs...
 
spanky said:
If you don't like atheist signs, don't read them.

BTW What is "not overly religious"? Does that mean you're a christian but don't shoot abortion doctors?
Click to expand...

Apparently, "not overly religious" in this case means still going along with the deranged sense of entitlement, paranoia, and persecution complex of a dominant privileged population (i.e. groups like that pushing the nativity scene in a public place who then whine and scream bloody murder when others attempt to pursue their own right to put up their own display), participating in bigotry (lumping in all atheists together instead of acknowledging their massive variation in principle and conduct...but then of course not shooting abortion doctors (you gotta have SOME limits).
 
First of all, am I the only one that caught this:

"Following the December 2011 controversy, the Santa Monica City Council voted in June to bar any future unattended private displays in Palisades Park, including Christmas crèches <I have no idea what this means btw> or atheist exhibits, regardless of content."

No one was even banned from putting up a display. What was banned is putting up an unattended display.

And there is no case of discrimination or even free speech violation here. The city doesn't have to allow people to put up scenes of any kind on public property, even if they allowed them to do so in the past. Most particularly if they can prove that leaving up unattended displays attracts illegal activity, i.e. vandalism, in the park and could leave the city liable for any damage done to the property of those who are allowed to leave things up in the park.

Now, I do think that some of the signs were inappropriate, but that is still their right to do so and should not make a difference to the other actions that occurred. Had I organized the sign thing, I would have left it to signs about other things, but that is just me. This guy won the right to put up his signs, fair and square. The same exact actions would have occurred had none of the "religion questioning" signs been displayed. Considering the vandalized signs/displays that we have seen weren't those that questioned religion, it is safe to assume that vandalism would have occurred if all of them would have been simply non-Christian messages or non-Abrahamic religious messages. Which would have still led to the same consequences.

My opinion is I'd rather have nothing displayed in a park to begin with. I find parks to be pretty without huge displays set up in them. And it makes it worse that all those had cages around them. It looked stupid. I think the city's decision was a good one. Everyone can just find private property to put up their beliefs/signs/displays on, and it will probably look better than what was up in the park. Especially since people tend to care much more about how something looks if it is on their property than if it is on public property.
 
lpast said:
Ill tell you whats not overly religious...a nativity scene...and I was not complaining about atheist signs...
Click to expand...

You don't find a life size 120 foot nativity diorama to be overly religious?
 
spanky said:
You don't find a life size 120 foot nativity diorama to be overly religious?
Click to expand...

If its just sitting there...and no one is hawking me to go to church or convert...NO it doesnt bother me...doesnt bother me like watching a group of atheists stand around a statue of satan..as long as they dont hawk me..........I just walk right past both of them and pay them no mind
 
lpast said:
If its just sitting there...and no one is hawking me to go to church or convert...NO it doesnt bother me...doesnt bother me like watching a group of atheists stand around a statue of satan..as long as they dont hawk me..........I just walk right past both of them and pay them no mind
Click to expand...

In public Palisades Park on Ocean Ave in Santa Monica?
 
lpast said:
If its just sitting there...and no one is hawking me to go to church or convert...NO it doesnt bother me...doesnt bother me like watching a group of atheists stand around a statue of satan..as long as they dont hawk me..........I just walk right past both of them and pay them no mind
Click to expand...

This was kind of an interesting statement...
 
jimbo said:
It seems to me that the touchdown got called back for an illegal play and in the process the Christians lost 15 yards
Click to expand...

Oh, right. The refs are calling a penalty for vandalism. Score is still zero to zero, but the Christians have the ball on 15 yard line now. The game is getting exciting now. Do you know who you're rooting for?
 
spanky said:
Just so I get this right, these churches are suing the government claiming their rights to freedom of speech were violated because the government wouldn't provide them a soapbox and place in the park?
Click to expand...

They are claiming that their right to speech supersedes everyone else's and that a fair lottery which doesn't award them control of all of the spots is somehow wrong.

So the city ended the practice because the religulous were vandalizing the other displays.
Click to expand...

That about sums it up.
 
Chaddelamancha said:
These atheist are what give us a bad name. You can't stand to see a nativity scene? Really? You going to get Christmas banned altogether? The whole holiday is based on pagan foundations, so to fight any part of the holiday is to effectively fight the entire holiday. It's silly, it's petty, and it's not what any decent atheist would/should do. Pathetic.
Click to expand...

Actually, today the whole holiday is secular, it's about Santa Claus and decorating trees and giving presents, with reindeer with glowing noses and snowmen and elves making toys. There's no religion in that whatsoever. If the religious want to have a ceremony in their churches, go for it. If they want to decorate their homes, fine by me. Governments are secular, there's no secular purpose to using tax money to support religious displays on public property.
 
Chaddelamancha said:
I'm not abdicating blame of those who vandalized the signs. But don't think that the atheists didn't know what they were doing.
Click to expand...

What makes you think that they didn't know what they were doing? Seems to me that they achieved their goals just fine.
 
Chaddelamancha said:
Explain that to the children who don't get to enjoy the nativity scenes down at the park anymore.
Click to expand...

Or to the atheist children who don't have to be beaten over the head with the prevalence of religious displays everywhere you look. After all, non-religion is the fastest growing segment of the population.
 
Chaddelamancha said:
I am not arguing about what it was shut down. My argument is about the timing of the message. I completely understand why the city shut it down, but to put all of the blame on the vandalism is wrong.
Click to expand...

How would there be any other timing? For one thing, this is the time of year that the city set up the displays, it makes no sense for them to put in for a display any other time of year. For another, they were criticizing the long-running, virtually wholly-Christian displays that had been put up for 40 years, what's the point of putting up a display in the middle of summer saying "remember those displays during Christmas?"

What you're really saying is that nobody ought to criticize religion and that religion ought to be given extra rights.

Try again.
 
Cephus said:
How would there be any other timing? For one thing, this is the time of year that the city set up the displays, it makes no sense for them to put in for a display any other time of year. For another, they were criticizing the long-running, virtually wholly-Christian displays that had been put up for 40 years, what's the point of putting up a display in the middle of summer saying "remember those displays during Christmas?"

What you're really saying is that nobody ought to criticize religion and that religion ought to be given extra rights.

Try again.
Click to expand...

It seems that culture, traditions, and the joy of Christmas,which a message to atheists and all religions alike, must be muted because some atheists are offended.

It will be a meaner joyless world we'll live in when atheists, "the fastest growing segment of the population" , get their way.
 
Grant said:
It seems that culture, traditions, and the joy of Christmas,which a message to atheists and all religions alike, must be muted because some atheists are offended.

It will be a meaner joyless world we'll live in when atheists, "the fastest growing segment of the population" , get their way.
Click to expand...

If you read the article, you'll find that the display that was vandalized was the atheists' display. Without making accusations as to who did it, maybe their message is the one that somebody thought should be muted because they were offended.

Maybe we'd be better off if the government did what they did and just didn't do the displays anymore. Rather than getting involved in religious battles.
 
lpast said:
If its just sitting there...and no one is hawking me to go to church or convert...NO it doesnt bother me...doesnt bother me like watching a group of atheists stand around a statue of satan..as long as they dont hawk me..........I just walk right past both of them and pay them no mind
Click to expand...

Why would atheists worship Satan? Seems to me that would more likely be Satanists.
 
Grant said:
It will be a meaner joyless world we'll live in when atheists, "the fastest growing segment of the population" , get their way.
Click to expand...

How do you make the leap from "atheist" to "meaner joyless world?" I'm sure the atheists would argue that without religion to kill over, mankind would be a lot happier.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Oh, right. The refs are calling a penalty for vandalism. Score is still zero to zero, but the Christians have the ball on 15 yard line now. The game is getting exciting now. Do you know who you're rooting for?
Click to expand...

I'm rooting for the First Amendment
 
Cephus said:
How would there be any other timing? For one thing, this is the time of year that the city set up the displays, it makes no sense for them to put in for a display any other time of year. For another, they were criticizing the long-running, virtually wholly-Christian displays that had been put up for 40 years, what's the point of putting up a display in the middle of summer saying "remember those displays during Christmas?"

What you're really saying is that nobody ought to criticize religion and that religion ought to be given extra rights.

Try again.
Click to expand...

What I am saying is that using a seasonal christmas display as a time to spout your anti-religious views is in bad taste. Its like standing next to a mall santa and telling the children that he isn't real. Why not put up season greetings messages? Why did that have to go with "religion is a myth"?
 
Blackdog said:
Again this does not excuse or change the fact the atheist was being a dick.
Click to expand...

Yes, LEGALLY, it does excuse the atheists for being a dick because being a dick is not illegal. However, vandalizing is. Therefore the only ones at fault are the idiots that vandalized.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom