Official Discussion Board Now Open!
Discussion February 1st, 2009Hey everyone,
Today we will be opening the official discussion board of the Canadian Atheist Bus Campaign. With this forum you can discuss, debate, and talk about atheism, religion, and a wide range of other related topics. I encourage everyone to sign up and start posting.
To access the forum please visit http://atheistbus.ca/forum.
Thanks!
February 2nd, 2009 at 2:29 am
Offgrid: You read like a Kabbalist…am I wrong?
February 2nd, 2009 at 2:37 am
Offgrid is just using these comments as advertising boards, he is (no longer) interested in engaging in conversation………unless (maybe) you agree with him/her lol
February 2nd, 2009 at 2:39 am
Good, we have a forum, maybe I will be able to edit my spelling mistakes on it!
February 2nd, 2009 at 2:57 am
Richard, Devon: My comments and replies are being deleted. I am trying to respond…..
I am not a Kabbalist, although I read the Zohar. I am not a “Christian” although I believe Jesus is the Word of God, and that he taught the true Way. I am not an Essene, although I aspire to live like them. I am not a Buddhist although I like the story of Siddhartha. I do not belong to any church or group. Maybe I’m “gnostic” since I am searching for knowledge of God.
February 2nd, 2009 at 3:42 am
i just want to know….what excatly you people think your getting out of these advertisements….just people who beleive in nothing? or for the conversation? and what excatly is your purpose, like “one day im going to learn the truth, god isnt real/god is real”
February 2nd, 2009 at 3:53 am
I think it’s a major mistake to allow an advertisement that clearly VIOLATES the copyright of the atheist bus ad.
The United Church should have created their own ad layout.
It’s typical of the destructive methods of the belief stricken to usurp the arguments of non-believers towards their own nefarious purposes.
I urge you to ask them to stop using the intellectual property of these otherwise excellent atheist bus ads.
Peter
February 2nd, 2009 at 4:28 am
I think atheism is some sort of insight, though nobody officially confirms that fact. I like the atheism and agnostic as a pairing of questioning, to me there is no proof of God, though there really remains a vastness of in in explicability, that the human mind will struggle to define what the higher nature is, though attempts at explanation predicates a possibility of the existence of a nature outside of the self of a larger unknown consequence.
February 2nd, 2009 at 4:54 am
Yes, Enjoy your Life…. Oui, Je suis vraiment content.
Philo on the Essenes of Mount Carmel 1st Century BC “God has breathed into man from heaven a portion of His own divinity. That which is divine is invisible. It may be extended, but it is incapable of separation. Consider how vast is the range of our thought over the past and the future, the heavens and the earth. This alliance with an upper world, of which we are conscious, would be impossible, were not the soul of man an indivisible portion of that divine and blessed spirit. Contemplation of the divine essence is the noblest exercise of man ; it is the only means of attaining to the highest truth and virtue, and therein to behold God is the consummation of our happiness here.”
February 2nd, 2009 at 8:10 am
…OK. We’re over here now. Yes, I saw the United Church ad in the newspaper. Right away, I thought, They are bankrupt creatively if they must rely on the atheistbus slogan: “There probably is no god. Now stop worrying, and enjoy your life.” It’s parasitical to cling to another’s creativity. I suppose the United Church brains are unable to devise their own slogan. However, the positive view is that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
What does the slogan mean? My understanding is this: “Stop worrying” about Hell, a fictional place made up to scare children. Unfortunately, it seems mature adults are unable or unwilling to shake off the nightmare of Hell. “Enjoy your life” — “Isn’t it a noble, an enlightened way of spending our brief time in the sun, to work at understanding the universe and how we have come to wake up in it?” (Dawkins) Yes, since we have a few years on this planet, let’s live them to the fullest possible, which includes, because we are sentient beings, striving for Truth by using logic, reason, and science to describe and understand the nature of the universe. I can’t see Truth coming from superstitious, dogmatic thinking with not a shred of supporting evidence. A “belief” is not evidence of anything.
Here we are, in this world, this earth, with other suns and planets swirling around out there, and with trillions upon trillions of atoms comprising everything, including our skin, blood, and brain matter. What is going on here? Really. I really want to know, and it is hard work to find out the nature of our existence. Faith and beliefs, having no substance, are inadequate. I feel satisfied when faced with results based on verifiable evidence. Therefore, I strive to learn; I read and read and read: history, philosophy, biology, astronomy, physics, and good fiction. Other media I use are audio books and documentary videos. If you really want to learn what’s going on here on this tiny planet and beyond, you can’t sit back and rely on faith, you must dive into the wealth of substantial information out there.
Like Sam Harris, I wish there was another word besides “atheist” to describe our position. Atheist was coined by the church as a derogatory term for unbelievers, who were usually burned at the stake for questioning religious claims. I rely on rational thought and reason, therefore, I can call myself a rationalist. Other terms are humanist, secularist, and freethinker. They’re all good words, but, basically, I think they mean “questioner.” There is no word for someone who questions the validity of astrology – there are no anti-astrologers. People who question religion are simply asking for evidence to back up such extraordinary claims.
I think the children’s story The Emperor’s New Clothes aptly describes religions. The king and his followers parade through the streets wearing the invisible clothes of faith, belief, and dogma. Everyone knows these clothes are actually imaginary, but are afraid (heresy, blasphemy) to speak up. Finally, a child (rationalist) breaks out laughing, saying, “The emperor has no clothes!”
Sure, millions, maybe billions of people on earth say they believe in a god, or follow a religion. Bertrand Russell said, “Even if a billion people believe in a bad idea, it’s still a bad idea.”
Anyways, that’s it for now. I know the above views will be attacked and ridiculed by the religious faithful. All I ask of them is to supply logic, reason, and evidence to back up their claims.
February 2nd, 2009 at 1:48 pm
Actually yes, having an actual belief stricken mainstream church advertise “There probably is a god” is at least a step forward since they didn’t say “There is a god”. It’s a step forward since they shifted from “IS” to “probably”. Unfortunately the probability of any god or gods existing is essentially zero as many of the well tested and well known laws of Nature prove. So their ad is also false advertising and thus they are violating false advertising laws as well as violating the copyright of the creator of the atheist ad.
E=mc^2, for example, proves that nothing can travel faster than the speed of c, light, which has the implication that there can be no being of any sort that is omnipresent, omnipotent nor omniscient.
Newton’s gravity equations, even though they are not as accurate as Einstein’, prove that no one, not even people named jesus, can “ascend” into the “heavens” (sky) without the aid of some sort of technology that can overcome gravity.
Biology proves that dead bodies don’t come back to life except in fictional accounts like Zombie movies.
But then rational thought and logic backed up by the facts of life hardly ever seems to have an impact upon the delusions of the belief stricken with their special needs for their invisible super friend. And yes I do mean “special needs” in the “special needs person” sense of the phrase.
NOW a new ad can poke fun at the United Crutch, church, for their use of probably rather than “is”.
A lawsuit suing the United Crutch, church, for violating the copyright of the atheist bus ad is in order. At least a cease and desist order to get them to stop is in order.
Get your own advertising United Crutch, church.
February 2nd, 2009 at 3:15 pm
Only the copyright holder can sue for copyright violation, as it is entirely up to them to allow it or not. In this case the copyright holder is probably Ariane Sherine, so it is up to her.
False advertising is probably the best angle to pursue as it could make for some very powerful rulings.
February 2nd, 2009 at 3:51 pm
Don’t go after the UCC…that would defeat one of the purposes of the campaign…dialogue! Whether the dialogue happens verbally or on the side of buses, it is still dialogue. People who see either sign will be forced to think about it.
At the same time, as I stated in a previous post on another thread, it defeats McVety’s complaint about the atheist ad being an attack. His compliant won’t fly because it uses the same format and wording…Any complaint would have to be directed at both campaigns. However, if we complain on the grounds of copyright infringement…we’ll truly be seen as attacking religion and freedom of expression. We cannot allow that to happen.
February 2nd, 2009 at 4:43 pm
Dialogue is the goal? That’s a bit lame. I have dialog with the Delusional Belief Stricken all the time. Not many of them have changed.
Building a political base would be a better goal to ensure that the bible, the equally mystical queen, and all other non-rational nonsense are removed from Canadian Government.
Separation of State and Crutch is most important.
February 2nd, 2009 at 4:57 pm
Richard, I do agree that there are advantages to letting the UCC’s adds, it would be unfair to say we were attacking them, they are the ones who copied the atheist bus add.
February 2nd, 2009 at 11:04 pm
Pish Posh,,,whether there is a God or not, it would seem that alot of people, religious or not are spending alot of valuable time on this issue…I can understand the part of the slogan that says, live your life…I like that…but then again I think that’s what most of us do everyday anyways…lets be realistic, not everyone is created equal when it comes to intelligence. Some are brillant, some are average and then some are “unfortunate” as my daughter would say…:)
Don’t expect all people to understand or care about the validity of the slogan,,,either slogan….they are busy living their lives…
I’ve pondering the meaning of life myself and being an “average” person of average thinking capability I feel that I can think about it, question it, and spend time talking about it but ultimately I would like to know the answer to, why are we here…?
February 3rd, 2009 at 1:43 am
“A long time ago, the raven looked down from the sky and saw that the people of the world were living in darkness.
The ball of light was kept hidden by a selfish old chief.
So the raven turned himself into a spruce needle and floated on the river where the chief’s daughter came for water.
She drank the spruce needle.
She became pregnant and gave birth to a boy, who was the raven in disguise.
The baby cried and cried until the chief gave him the ball of light to play with.
As soon as he had the light, the raven turned back into himself.
The raven carried the light into the sky.
From then on, we no longer lived in darkness.”
February 3rd, 2009 at 2:03 am
Well…dialogue is not theonly goal..but keep in mind that there is no way in the world that anyone is going to convert the delusional…The campaign’s target is really the fence-sitter, the one with doubts but not the courage to question or assert his/her doubts. Let the UCC do what they want…it does not harm our campaign, it only brings it to the forefront. There is no crime if there is no victim.
February 3rd, 2009 at 9:38 am
Dear Trudy
I, too, am working hard to find out what is really true. I read and read, study, listen to audio books, and ask questions. But I’ve found there is no reason “why” we are here. Your parents got together, and here you are — there’s no why about it. But while we are here, we must make the best of it.
When one asks “why” humans are here on earth, it seems one is presupposing an intelligent force out there, beyond the wispy clouds, that has a plan. It seems there is no cosmic plan, Trudy, since there is no evidence to support a god.
Yes, you and your daughter are correct — most people have devoted their lives to the fantasy of religion. But the problem here, which is not pish-posh, is that they want us to follow their fantasy life, and they’ll pass laws to force us to do it.
February 7th, 2009 at 11:41 pm
The most puzzling logic in the slogan, in my opinion, is this. “Now stop worrying…”
I have heard that atheists and agnostics are serious about inquiry and love to question things.
Therefore, as an analyst of the rhetoric of this advertisement, may I please ask, who is supposed to be worried that requires such a reassurance, and why are they supposedly worried, and will this spiritual hypothesis be a cure?
It could be taken to presume that people of faith are “worrying” more than others because of their belief in a God. If so, is that really true? Can it be proven that people of faith worry more, or is the opposite true, that it builds their sense of peace and confidence? That would be worth inquiring about.
But taking as a given that the ad is likely to address people who are “worried” about anything in particular, it is very likely to build instant identification (like a horoscope) since many of us would admit we are worried to some degree on a given day, and it also takes the soothing tone of a counselor.
This is psychologically effective rhetoric, but is it reasonable?
Shouldn’t a wise counselor be careful to inquire about whether the symptom (worry) is a sign of something bad, or of something healthy?
The presumption that worry is always bad is gathered from many self-help psychology books that tell all readers, regardless of any knowledge of their individual moral state, that they are “good” people. Well, of course, if you are selling a self-help book, or you are a psychologist who is being paid to reduce anxiety, you will have an economic interest in presuming that worry is always bad, no questions asked.
This ad seems to be afflicted with the same sort of universal blindness to audience and situation, and a bias toward selling a certain metaphysical cure. If you are an atheist or agnostic, then you will tend to presume that reality is material and that the metaphysical realm is nonexistent or irrelevant mumbo jumbo, and why? Because that is your personal belief preference.
Excuse me, but how do you know me, and who are you to judge my goodness or whether my feelings of worry are justified? Dear bus ad, how do you know that I don’t have a very good reason to worry about myself (or my family or society), especially in light of the possibility (which neither of us can disprove) that there could be a just God who will reward or judge fairly?
Even if we decide all worry is bad, if you have the specific diagnosis wrong (the real cause of the painful or bothersome worry), then the cure will not be relevant and might even be harmful.
Should murderers who realize they have done something wrong stop worrying about their moral goodness because “there is probably no god”?
Does “there is probably no god” help atheists stop worrying about whether faith groups are going to pass laws that make it impossible for them to practice atheism without risk?
Should citizens stop worrying about the policies of their government because “there is probably no god”?
Maybe the ad takes the word “worry” very broadly and is not referring to a painful emotional state but an intellectual desire to know what is real and what is true in the metaphysical realm. Sounds like the same good impulse behind scientific, ethical and political inquiry.
Is the ad presuming that a concerned inquiry about anything likely to have an uncertain answer is a state of inappropriate worry?
If so, we should stop inquiring about environmental degradation. We apparently can’t come to a conclusive answer about whether a particular global environmental crisis will occur in 20 or 1000 years from now, and even if we are certain, there is great debate about whether the solutions are worse than the problem. But what if it demands action now? What if stopping worry or discourse or inquiry will just leave us indecisively standing by?
February 8th, 2009 at 4:50 am
I take “stop worrying” to mean that you don’t need to worry that there is no god, its not such a bad thing…its not the end of the world
February 9th, 2009 at 6:21 am
Dear Rhetorical Analyst:
People who believe in a god, by definition, believe in an afterlife where the good go to a heavenly paradise full of angels, yummy food, and untold pleasures, and the bad sinners go to a horrible Hell where they burn constantly, suffering excruciating pain for eternity. Of course, this worries the “faithful.” Since there is no evidence that any type of god or gods exist, and therefore no afterlife, there is no worry about this horrific possibility.
Now, you are going to bring up the idea of morals here on earth, and that is another question. Morals existed well before religions were invented; therefore, religions are not the source of morality — human nature is, and the necessity for rules in a community.