Uproars Entertainment

What is the difference between atheists publicizing their point of view and those who are religious ?

publicizing theirs? There was such an uproar about the atheist sign in Washington. Shouldn't it be a two way street? Or would it be better to have neither one?

Public Comments

1. it invites trouble when the majority identifies as christian......
2. There is no difference. There was only an up roar because there are too many with closed minds.
3. Two way street, imo. Without either, where's the fun in religious debate?
4. Don't you just love Christmas? It brings out the greatest worst in man.
5. atheism is Not relig and its rude to do that.....why are they in relig at all....for what....if they hate God, see politics and science..... THE DIFFERENCE IS OPENLY RUNNING DOWN SWEET PEOPLE WHO BELIEVE THE TRUTH....you will all find someday that we are telling the truth.....JESUS WILL RETURN... GOD IS REAL....OTHERWISE THEY WOULDNT CARE TO DO THAT.....SATAN HATES GOD....HES STIRS PPL UP...
6. the former tend to rely overly on facts
7. I'd be happiest with neither one. But as long as the religious get their billboards, I want the atheists to have some too.
8. I see no difference. If the religious are allowed to post something religious on public property, they should expect others to offer a different point of view.
9. No difference at all. But the reaction does show a very hypocritical streak. And if that is "normal" for Christianity. Then I'm glad I don't have to identify with it. I'd be ashamed for my belief..... And for those who say, that its wrong to put down others faith. Well, each time a "believer" says there is a god, he is putting down and insulting the intelligence of an atheist. AS long as the on side can publicly state there is a God / Lord / Jesus / pink unicorn /or whatever, its OK for Atheist to publicly state that there isn't.
10. the atheist sign is an INTOLERANT rant...
11. The atheist message was hate mail to the believers. Totally disrespectful.
12. This example is one of the few times I believe in an all-or-nothing approach.
13. The difference is what they promote. I have no grudge against atheists who want to make their voice heard (even if I disagree with their views). I do have a problem when one group wants to publicize their views but don't want to allow opposing views to be publicized.
14. First they have the right to post any sign they want to. Now, others don't have to believe in God or Allah or any other religion, yet I feel that atheist sign will set a bad precedent. That was a statement and had nothing to do with the theme of the holiday season. Why couldn't they post a sign that said "Let's remember the natural world and the natural beauty that it gives us". Still they choice to put out a bias agenda. Then when other people want to post a statement then they will have cause to do so. I am a christian and I will feel the same way if a christian group posted a similar tone about atheist or anyone. ____ There is a major difference between a "statement with obvious intent" and a "bunch of plastic figures laying on some straw that is open to interpretation" ____ Punch: actually it was: "Why believe in a god? Just be good for goodness' sake." Be exact now
15. Depends on how it's done. When people put up Christmas trees or nativity sets, it's celebrating their beliefs, which I see nothing wrong with. If they put up a sign saying "non believers will burn in hell," I would think that kind of a negative message is rude and doesn't belong. If Atheists can put something up that is a positive expression of their beliefs, without putting down others, that'd be fine. Unfortunately, it usully is a negative message such as "people who believe in God are delusional and religion is the opiate of the masses." I don't think that belongs. And that's what people complain about mainly, that it's not just a celebratory positive expression of one group's beliefs, but a put-down of another group's beliefs.
16. The one that got me was the sign on the bus. Be good for goodness sakes. It said nothing against religion, But the up roar. Such a bad message. Christians believe that Christmas "time" is all about Jesus. They have a hard time sharing it. Desi, Why believe in god is a question. It does not say that god is bad, or wrong. It does not criticize. It is the same as a Christian saying Why not believe in god. I'm sure you would agree that there is nothing wrong with that.
17. I'm an atheist, but I found it a ridiculous sign to be honest. Of course they're trying to make a point, and it's even a valid point: equal right to free religious speech and displays. There's just a billion things they could have done to make that point. I honestly don't understand why a group of atheists had to put up a sign that had no other true purpose than to offend. If we can't even let Christians and Pagans undisturbedly celebrate Christmas in peace we should also stop whining about Fred Phelps with his hideous "God hates fags" signs. I'm gonna continue whining about Phelps. Thus I'm also gonna whine about this disrespectful atheist display.
18. the religious get away with it more
19. The difference is that it is still somehow acceptable to discriminate against atheists. Here in Colorado, a billboard sign company REFUSED to allow an atheist billboard that had already been paid for, once they realized what the message was. (The message read, "Don't believe in God? You are not alone") When they had previously allowed religious themed billboards. I'm not quite sure how that is even legal.
20. Well you can't have neither. That's like saying we should get rid of fat and not-fat people. It leaves no one. One is a positive content message. The other is the disbelief in that content. Atheism has always been parasitic which is why truly solid minds often end up rejecting it. You can't base your life on non-belief.