Atheist messages displace CA park nativity scenes

[Hyena Dandy]

I'm not saying they should be forced to do this or even to stay on-topic. I'm more saying I wish they'd done something more constructive with their opportunity here, rather than blowing it on a bit or spite, and offered that up as an example or suggestion of a constructive concept they could have picked up on

But they are not just speaking out against Christianity. They are objecting to religion in general.

[Kheldarson]

So they could point out why the original pagan traditions were crap too. The point is that there are other things they could do (snarky, educational, point-blank) that would be better served in the space than what they're doing right now. Which makes them seem like kindergartners hanging on to all the toys just to make sure nobody else gets to play with them.

Personally I think it would be cool for them to just have "Happy Winter" signs or something. You know, give a holiday-ish/seasonal greeting without touching on religion. That would be far more polite. Especially since that seems to be the purpose of the decoration cages to begin with.

[KabeRinnaul]

But they are not just speaking out against Christianity. They are objecting to religion in general.

By disrupting a presentation of the Christian nativity. I'm just considering their venue here. And that's really the key. Christianity, and in particular the celebration of Christmas, is such a major part of this country and so overwhelming in presence at this time of year, that an argument against any other religion would essentially be a non sequitur, and an argument for any other religion effectively serves as a reminder that the beliefs on display here aren't anything unique or special.

But if you want to ensure that the presentation is entirely atheist, you could take my same concepts and push them a step further. When presenting each religion, why not present their most absurd beliefs, and point out why each one in particular shouldn't be followed. Or for the "history of the season" one, use the displays to show why each tradition is BS.

Or hell, just put up decorations saying "Happy Sunday" or "Have a nice secular weekend". You know, do something to put some message out, rather than just ensuring that no one else gets to enjoy themselves.

[AdminAssistant]

Am I the only one wondering why they had religious displays set up in a city park in the first place?

[Kheldarson]

Because of tradition? Because it's Christmas and that's what we do?

[AdminAssistant]

That's what Christians do. A religious display should not be put on publicly-owned property.

[Hyena Dandy]

That's what Christians do. A religious display should not be put on publicly-owned property.

They had previously always put the spots up for an auction. This year, more people tried to get spots, so they put it up for lottery. I think if everyone gets a fair chance to express themselves, they should be able to do it. The difference comes when either the local government forbids a certain group from putting something up, or erects something religious themselves.

[Andara Bledin]

That's what Christians do. A religious display should not be put on publicly-owned property.

Why is it that whenever it comes to publicly owned property, everybody forgets that the property gets rented out to people who are not public entities.

Yes, the government has a duty to keep religion out of the politics, but that doesn't require that they refuse to let private citizens be religious within public spaces.

As an example, the separation denies a public school from requiring that the students spend a part of their day in prayer, but those same students in that same location can choose to pray if they so wish.

In this case, the city had 21 spaces for displays at the park. Those spaces have been up for auction repeatedly and up until recently the only people who made any effort to buy them were Christian.

Why are you attacking the park for the apathy of the rest of the field? They should be chastised because until recently the Atheists, Muslims, Jews, etc, all ignored the offer to rent the spaces?

^-.-^

[Ghel]

I think the lottery system is a good idea when they've got more people/groups wanting to put up displays than they have space available. It's fair, and it prevents the city from showing favoritism to one group.

However, it looks like the lottery system needs tweaking. Here's how I would improve it: Each person or group that enters the lottery has to enter a proposed display to show that they intend to actually USE the space. Each person/group can still enter multiple times, up to a certain number (I think 9 is high), but each space will be drawn separately. Displays that are not set up by a specified date will have their space re-allocated to another person or group picked randomly in the same manner as the original lottery.

I don't think anybody in Santa Monica will read this, but if I lived in the area, this is what I would propose.

[Andara Bledin]

That's actually an excellent suggestion all around.

I, too, think 9 per person, when you have a total of 21, is high. I think allowing up to 3 per applicant, giving a minimum of 7 individuals a chance to display their own views in the park, would be a far more equitable arrangement.

^-.-^

[BlaqueKatt]

Where does Hyena use a "shut the hell up" argument?

Can't we just get along? Can't we agree to disagree? Neither of us can prove our side with 100% certainty, so there's no point in even having this discussion. Can't we just live and let live?

I... Did you actually READ the rest of my post?

did you read the links I provided that explain pretty well how I feel?

If you read just one of them, read this one, all the way through, and maybe you'll understand.

Included in this is a desire for an open discourse.

no, you cannot have open discourse if you claim your belief has to be treated differently than any other belief, your setting up one set of rules for yourself,"my beliefs can't be criticized" for the multitude of reason you proceeded to list. You cannot have open discourse when they playing field is so far from level as to be a cliff.

Now I will attempt to explain why religion is not the same as any other hypothesis. The reason is that people do not define their lives by other hypotheses. <snip> It does not just state a fact about the world, it also defines how they see and understand it.

that is just plain ignorance.
I live my life trying to do as much good and alleviate as much human suffering as possible THROUGH MY ACTIONS, because my belief in evolution says "this is all we get, make the best of it as there is no place where everything is magically all better"


and honestly, there are over 50 currently practiced religions on this planet, all of them believe theirs is the one truth, is that even plausible, especially as most of them are contradictory to each other.
Has it ever occurred to you that you could be mistaken? What would it take to change your beliefs? You give me tangible proof that there is a god(and books written 2000 years ago, and personal feelings are not proof), and I'll change my mind, if it was proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that there is no god would you change yours?

In fact, the section you quoted, and earlier in the writing, I said I would like to have an open, honest exchange of ideas. I like to think that we can learn something even from people we disagree with, if we are able to talk to them courteously.

that is based on the highly incorrect assumption that "Atheist's just don't understand religion", when in fact Atheists score higher on religious knowledge/knowledge of the bible than ANY RELIGIOUS GROUP.

[Hyena Dandy]

no, you cannot have open discourse if you claim your belief has to be treated differently than any other belief, your setting up one set of rules for yourself,"my beliefs can't be criticized" for the multitude of reason you proceeded to list. You cannot have open discourse when they playing field is so far from level as to be a cliff.

I did not say 'my beliefs can't be criticized'. I said that they shouldn't be mocked, for the reason that mockery will harm the possibility to continue to have a debate. It will make them angry at you, and they will tune you out. If you are an atheist, and you are actually trying to get people to change their mind on religion, then you need to try to appeal to them. Not just repeat arguments that appeal to you. Mockery is great when you're with people who you agree with. I mean, it's fun to do. I won't say it isn't. But when you take it into public, and try to use it to convince people you disagree with... That's not going to work. You won't convince someone by insulting them. That makes them angry. They stop listening to you. They don't care what you say, they only know that they don't want to hear you anymore.

that is based on the highly incorrect assumption that "Atheist's just don't understand religion", when in fact Atheists score higher on religious knowledge/knowledge of the bible than ANY RELIGIOUS GROUP.

Umm... What does... Doesn't that kind of actually prove my point? "I like to think that we can learn something even from people who we disagree with" doesn't only go one way. I didn't say "Atheists don't know anything about religion."

that is just plain ignorance.
I live my life trying to do as much good and alleviate as much human suffering as possible THROUGH MY ACTIONS, because my belief in evolution says "this is all we get, make the best of it as there is no place where everything is magically all better"

I don't see how that has anything to do with what I said... At all. That seems entirely non-sequitor. I'm glad you try to better other people's lives. I too try to better other people's lives. I think that this is a good thing to do. I don't care why you do it.

[quote]and honestly, there are over 50 currently practiced religions on this planet, all of them believe theirs is the one truth, is that even plausible, especially as most of them are contradictory to each other.[quote]

I don't see what your point is in that. Of course some are false. Many might be false. In fact, they all might be false. I have considered that.

Has it ever occurred to you that you could be mistaken?

Of course it has, don't insult me. I used to be an atheist. Now I'm a Christian. I'm looking at other religions, too. The Yoruba faiths have me very interested, and I'm trying to find out more about it.

What would it take to change your beliefs? You give me tangible proof that there is a god(and books written 2000 years ago, and personal feelings are not proof), and I'll change my mind, if it was proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that there is no god would you change yours?

I don't know, honestly. Because I take more than just facts from my religion. I take it as a way to live life.




I'm beginning to think you're not actually reading my posts, just sort of adapting things I say into arguments they sound kind of like. I understand that you probably hear the arguments they sound like a lot, because I know I have. They're silly arguments, and they're not the ones I'm making.

[Lachrymose]

Because of tradition?

O whacking day! O whacking day!
Our hallowed snake skull cracking day!

[Kheldarson]

*snerk* That's great.

[Duelist925]

did you read the links I provided that explain pretty well how I feel?

If you read just one of them, read this one, all the way through, and maybe you'll understand.

1st: That in no way explains how Hyena used a "shut the hell up" argument. Please explain this, as its the only part of my post you chose to respond too. I really want to know!

2nd: I've read the articles. I simply disagree with most of them. They are well written, and this one, that you link again, even has a few good points. I simply disagree with them.

no, you cannot have open discourse if you claim your belief has to be treated differently than any other belief, your setting up one set of rules for yourself,"my beliefs can't be criticized" for the multitude of reason you proceeded to list. You cannot have open discourse when they playing field is so far from level as to be a cliff.

Did you even read Hyena's post? It's honestly looking like you didn't. I will sum up:
"Mocking someones beliefs will not sway them in said beliefs. It'll just piss them off, and make them cling harder to said beliefs. So, if one wishes to debate or discuss such things, its better to do so in a way that isn't mocking or insulting. "

that is just plain ignorance.
I live my life trying to do as much good and alleviate as much human suffering as possible THROUGH MY ACTIONS, because my belief in evolution says "this is all we get, make the best of it as there is no place where everything is magically all better"

How is it ignorance? Hell, how can you see that argument as anything but fact? Many people DO identify very strongly with their religions, almost as strongly as they do their freaking race or sexuality. WHere does "ignorance" come into play?

and honestly, there are over 50 currently practiced religions on this planet, all of them believe theirs is the one truth, is that even plausible, especially as most of them are contradictory to each other.

1st: Not all believe that theirs is the one truth. I fully admit, this is more true for individuals than religions as a whole, but I know many people, myself included, who cheerfully admit they could be wrong, or that there could be multiple "paths to god" or some such.

2nd: Yes it is plausible. Its equally plausible that ALL are right, or NONE are right. Hell, for all that we can prove freaking Lovecraft might be right, and Azathoth sits gibbering mindlessly over his court.

Has it ever occurred to you that you could be mistaken? What would it take to change your beliefs? You give me tangible proof that there is a god(and books written 2000 years ago, and personal feelings are not proof), and I'll change my mind, if it was proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that there is no god would you change yours?

If anyone could bring me concrete proof that there was no god, or that god preferred Judaism, or Islam, or Wicca, or any of a number of forms of paganism, or freaking Buddhism, I would change my beliefs. It would take time, and some deep damn soul searching, but yeah, concrete, shadow-less doubt proof? Yeah.

Also: No freaking sane christian cites the bible as "Proof" of god. The bible was written, and has been printed by man for thousands of years, and translated so many times Im surprised it makes ANY sense now.

There is a flaw in your argument tho--assuming god exists, and he as all powerful as some think...how in the nine hells do you prove or disprove something like that if it doesn't want you to?

that is based on the highly incorrect assumption that "Atheist's just don't understand religion", when in fact Atheists score higher on religious knowledge/knowledge of the bible than ANY RELIGIOUS GROUP.

Cool, good for them.

What the hay does that assumption, or that arguemnt, have to do with anything said?

Heres what was said:

In fact, the section you quoted, and earlier in the writing, I said I would like to have an open, honest exchange of ideas. I like to think that we can learn something even from people we disagree with, if we are able to talk to them courteously.

Now...how in the world does that indicate Hyena fell into that assumption? Did you just assume they meant "atheists can learn about religion!"? You really should have asked for clarification before jumping to such a conclusion. Hey, maybe it meant, "Religious practitioners can learn Atheists are just regular people too!" or maybe "Atheists can learn not all Christians are up their own asses morons!" or some such.