• 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

Grant said:
That's as far as the atheists have come along in their philosophical message? Defacing signs?

They're going to have to try a little harder if they're to gain any converts.
Click to expand...

Did you not read the story or the thread? The signs were put up by the atheists and some had messages expressing peace, love, etc. along with reason and other beliefs. Those signs were defaced by someone.
 
roguenuke said:
Did you not read the story or the thread? The signs were put up by the atheists and some had messages expressing peace, love, etc. along with reason and other beliefs. Those signs were defaced by someone.
Click to expand...

In fact I did read the article and didn't see anything about atheists spreading the Christian message, or any message of substance of their own..
 
Grant said:
In fact I did read the article and didn't see anything about atheists spreading the Christian message, or any message of substance of their own..
Click to expand...

Peace and love aare not messages of substance now?
 
Grant said:
In fact I did read the article and didn't see anything about atheists spreading the Christian message, or any message of substance of their own..
Click to expand...

Then you weren't looking.

a5_99.jpg

Plus, this is another story about this.

Atheists crowd out scenes of Nativity | The Columbus Dispatch

I can't find a pic of the sign mentioned at the end, but that sounds like a nice message to me.

“Happiness is the only good. The time to be happy is now. The place to be happy is here. The way to be happy is to make others so.” -Robert Ingersoll
 
winston53660 said:
Peace and love aare not messages of substance now?
Click to expand...

I don't think "Happy Solstice" represents peace and love, lol. That was the most cheerful sign they had up that I saw, in the article anyway.

I don't think atheists need any specific holiday message to begin with. I just don't understand why some of them feel the need to bash it or ruin it for everyone else religious or not. I mean in reality the holidays have not been about the birth of Christ for awhile now. I mean it is more a commercial feel good thing now then a celebration of Christianity.
 
Blackdog said:
I will say again somehow you know who did the vandalism? Did not think so. So that has nothing to do with what I am saying. It has nothing to do with the vandalism or the law. It does not absolve them of the fact he was being a prick. End of story.
Click to expand...

I honestly don't understand why this is so difficult for some people to grasp :doh

It's a really simple concept.
 
roguenuke said:
Then you weren't looking.

View attachment 67138592

Plus, this is another story about this.

Atheists crowd out scenes of Nativity | The Columbus Dispatch

I can't find a pic of the sign mentioned at the end, but that sounds like a nice message to me.

“Happiness is the only good. The time to be happy is now. The place to be happy is here. The way to be happy is to make others so.” -Robert Ingersoll
Click to expand...

I mean you don't think this...

atheist-scrooge-nyt-1226-art-gegfd7fp-1calif-atheists-display-2-675694-jpg.jpg


Co-opting a Christian emblem and making fun of it as well is a joyous Christmas message?
 
Blackdog said:
I don't think "Happy Solstice" represents peace and love, lol. That was the most cheerful sign they had up that I saw, in the article anyway.

I don't think atheists need any specific holiday message to begin with. I just don't understand why some of them feel the need to bash it or ruin it for everyone else religious or not. I mean in reality the holidays have not been about the birth of Christ for awhile now. I mean it is more a commercial feel good thing now then a celebration of Christianity.
Click to expand...

I think it is great the atheist want to share their message of Peace. Christians do not have exclusive rights to it and should practice some peace love and understanding themesleves.
 
Grant said:
In fact I did read the article and didn't see anything about atheists spreading the Christian message, or any message of substance of their own..
Click to expand...
are you suggesting that only christians are capable of peace and love? or spreading the message of peace and love? or own the concept?
IIRC, hippies used the peace and love message a lot back in the 60's...
 
winston53660 said:
I think it is great the atheist want to share their message of Peace. Christians do not have exclusive rights to it and should practice some peace love and understanding themesleves.
Click to expand...

Then why all the attacks? They could have just got the spots and put up things like the Holiday greetings sign. Instead they put up things insulting to anyone who is religious as well. So it goes both ways.
 
Blackdog said:
I mean you don't think this...

atheist-scrooge-nyt-1226-art-gegfd7fp-1calif-atheists-display-2-675694-jpg.jpg


Co-opting a Christian emblem and making fun of it as well is a joyous Christmas message?
Click to expand...

It doesn't bother me. Their message is their choice. You don't get to tell them what they should have to put up just because you or others feel only certain things should go up for certain times of the year. If they wanted to put up a Halloween display, that would be their choice/right. They won the space fair and square.

and frankly, if that message offends you, then you need to question why you are offended by it It merely asks for a little reason added to the season. It isn't vulgar or distasteful.
 
Blackdog said:
Then why all the attacks? They could have just got the spots and put up things like the Holiday greetings sign. Instead they put up things insulting to anyone who is religious as well. So it goes both ways.
Click to expand...

Attacks? You mean like holding up a sign that insists that "Jesus is the reason for the season" right next to the atheist displays? There are many who don't believe Jesus was born on Christmas, or even in December. There are many who celebrated the Solstice long before Christianity and many still do. There are other religions with holidays/celebrations during this time. Why do some Christians have to insist that the only reason is "Jesus"?
 
roguenuke said:
It doesn't bother me. Their message is their choice. You don't get to tell them what they should have to put up just because you or others feel only certain things should go up for certain times of the year. If they wanted to put up a Halloween display, that would be their choice/right. They won the space fair and square.

and frankly, if that message offends you, then you need to question why you are offended by it It merely asks for a little reason added to the season. It isn't vulgar or distasteful.
Click to expand...

I merely asks for a little reason? That in itself is condescending and just as bad. Obviously you don't care if it is a positive message or not since you said you don't care either way. So how can you say it "sounds like a nice message to me."
 
roguenuke said:
Attacks? You mean like holding up a sign that insists that "Jesus is the reason for the season" right next to the atheist displays? There are many who don't believe Jesus was born on Christmas, or even in December. There are many who celebrated the Solstice long before Christianity and many still do. There are other religions with holidays/celebrations during this time. Why do some Christians have to insist that the only reason is "Jesus"?
Click to expand...

We know for a fact he was not. This does not change the fact this is a tradition going back to ancient Rome. Here in the US it has always been the reason for the season, so this is an insult now?
 
Blackdog said:
Then why all the attacks? They could have just got the spots and put up things like the Holiday greetings sign. Instead they put up things insulting to anyone who is religious as well. So it goes both ways.
Click to expand...

Atheist insult Christians, period And vice versa. Now grow up and and like adults both you!
 
winston53660 said:
Atheist insult Christians, period And vice versa. Now grow up and and like adults both you!
Click to expand...

That's about how I feel about this whole issue and all sides involved.
 
Blackdog said:
We know for a fact he was not. This does not change the fact this is a tradition going back to ancient Rome. Here in the US it has always been the reason for the season, so this is an insult now?
Click to expand...

There was a woman holding up that sign about Jesus. It can be found by looking up some of the images on this issue.

It is an insult to assume it is the only reason and has been so, even in the US.
 
roguenuke said:
There was a woman holding up that sign about Jesus. It can be found by looking up some of the images on this issue.

It is an insult to assume it is the only reason and has been so, even in the US.
Click to expand...

So the truth is an insult? LMAO! OK. Well you win, I am done with this. I think Winston summed it up quite nicely.
 
spanky said:
As a matter of fact, I don't. I accepted without contention that SM charged fees for the spots, if for no other reason then it sounded reasonable. But if you want to play this game, I will. That statement assumes facts not in evidence so I reject them until the OP can prove it via reputable cites.
Click to expand...

Looking around, I can't find any explicit references to monies paid. I did find one article that described the process of handing out plots as an "auction" -- suggestive of a paid exchange, but again not explicit.

I did, however find a number of descriptions for why unattended displays were banned in general, and it had nothing to do with the cost of maintaining the park:

Some council members said that, although they personally enjoyed seeing the displays, they wanted to head off increasingly rancorous confrontations over freedom of speech and religion that would cost the city time and money.
Click to expand...

Santa Monica to ban private, unattended displays at park - Los Angeles Times

The city successfully argued before a judge that the process of handing out plots and cleaning up afterwards costs money -- but as I've shown above that wasn't the driving force behind ending the practice, as you had contended.
 
Blackdog said:
I merely asks for a little reason? That in itself is condescending and just as bad. Obviously you don't care if it is a positive message or not since you said you don't care either way. So how can you say it "sounds like a nice message to me."
Click to expand...

I don't care. I see the problem as being solely about the vandalism. I said in my first post I would have done things differently.

The post I showed that you quoted and commented on was directed at someone who tried to say that Christians are the only ones who put out messages of peace, joy, love, etc. I was showing a sign from the other side that was vandalized that was loving and you countered with a sign that although not a message of love or anything like that, still isn't vulgar or really insulting unless you are pretty sensitive.

They are putting out their message. I would have stuck with other, secular messages if it were me putting it up, but it wasn't me. It was another group who choose something more controversial, but that is still their right no matter how distasteful you and others may find it. It is still their right.

And the big problem is that a) this decision by the counsel is being challenged on some stupid basis of a right that doesn't exist (you do not have the right to force a city park to allow you to put up displays, particularly unattended, which could cost them money in trying to prevent vandalism) and b) the article tried to blame everything on the atheists displays, when even if they were more subtle and all were like the one I did post, going off of that and a couple of other photos of the vandalism I have seen, they still would have been vandalized and the exact same actions taken.
 
Blackdog said:
So the truth is an insult? LMAO! OK. Well you win, I am done with this. I think Winston summed it up quite nicely.
Click to expand...

It is hers and possibly your own version of the truth, but that doesn't make it fact. I don't believe Jesus was born on Christmas or any of the story of the nativity, yet I still celebrate Christmas. It has nothing to do with Jesus to me and to many others. So yes, it is "insulting" in a way for someone to try to claim that Jesus is the only reason for the season (I am strong enough to not care though, but will point it out when necessary to make my point).
 
roguenuke said:
It is hers and possibly your own version of the truth, but that doesn't make it fact. I don't believe Jesus was born on Christmas or any of the story of the nativity, yet I still celebrate Christmas. It has nothing to do with Jesus to me and to many others. So yes, it is "insulting" in a way for someone to try to claim that Jesus is the only reason for the season (I am strong enough to not care though, but will point it out when necessary to make my point).
Click to expand...

I said we know it was not on Christmas, I also mentioned it was started in ancient Rome. It does not matter what you believe as far as Christianity or not believes. In the US it is a historical fact, period. Has nothing to do with being insulting as it is an irrefutable fact.
 
Blackdog said:
I said we know it was not on Christmas, I also mentioned it was started in ancient Rome. It does not matter what you believe as far as Christianity or not believes. In the US it is a historical fact, period. Has nothing to do with being insulting as it is an irrefutable fact.
Click to expand...

For many, it is that reason. Not all. And things change when people become more educated about facts. It is not a fact that everyone, even when this country was founded, believed that Christmas or even the season was all about Jesus. Even then, there were some who celebrated the solstice or who were Jewish or who had other beliefs or who believed nothing at all.
 
roguenuke said:
For many, it is that reason. Not all. And things change when people become more educated about facts. It is not a fact that everyone, even when this country was founded, believed that Christmas or even the season was all about Jesus. Even then, there were some who celebrated the solstice or who were Jewish or who had other beliefs or who believed nothing at all.
Click to expand...

I doubt most of the Native Indians cared about jesus. I know my Sioux friend still follows and believes in her Indian ways.
 
roguenuke said:
For many, it is that reason. Not all. And things change when people become more educated about facts. It is not a fact that everyone, even when this country was founded, believed that Christmas or even the season was all about Jesus. Even then, there were some who celebrated the solstice or who were Jewish or who had other beliefs or who believed nothing at all.
Click to expand...

I agree, this however does not change the reality of the history behind it. I mean upwards of 90% of the US citizenry and still around 70% today was or is identified as Christian (not including native Americans obviously) it is part of our history. It is not a lie or exaggeration, it just is what it is. I admit she probably meant it to be some kind of all encompassing statement about the holidays and she would be wrong in that way. Historically however, it is nothing insulting at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom