State of Protest DC Metro Bus Ad Update:
Tonight, as I was cabbing home through the rain in DC, I saw a bus ad I hadn’t seen before. It was night and raining, and the bus was traveling in the opposite direction, so I didn’t get a chance to snap a shot of it. It read:
Pre-Update: Please note that Sanguine Satire located the correct information about the origin of the bus ad about six hours before Alan Nelson’s comment below. Sanguine apparently found it by emailing CBS Outdoors (The ad company). Thanks, Sanguine Satire!
NEW UPDATE 12-18: Thanks to commenter Alan Nelson, from godonthebus.org, I now have accurate and verified data about the new ad I saw.
TRUTH
The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.”
click for full size
(photo is from godonthebus.org)
This was my first time seeing this ad, and I haven’t heard of this particular one being touted as the next best ad in the “war.”
The reasoning, according to the God on the Bus website:
About the campaign
The God on the Bus campaign started in response to recent anti-Christian ads that have been appearing in parts of the country. A group of us were talking about how we were tired of these attacks and we wish someone would respond. After discussion and prayer, we decided that we would do something ourselves. We enlisted the help of several Christian organizations to put this together. Our goal is that this will have a positive effect and if we reach just one person, the campaign was worth the effort and cost.
Luke 15:4-7: “What man of you, having a hundred sheep, if he loses one of them, does not leave the ninety-nine in the wilderness, and go after the one which is lost until he finds it? And when he has found it, he lays it on his shoulders, rejoicing. And when he comes home, he calls together his friends and neighbors, saying to them, ‘Rejoice with me, for I have found my sheep which was lost!’ I say to you that likewise there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine just persons who need no repentance.”
Obviously, this is but another log in the bonfire of the pro-Christian, anti-atheist/humanist campaign. It’s the next step in the overly defensive reaction to the Why believe in a god? humanist campaign.
A few Google searches result in at least one pro-Christian blog foretelling the future from all the way back in November:
Atheists Attempting To Convert…
I bet you we will see more and more of this now that a full fledged card caring member of the LWL {Left Wing Loons} has become elected President….
The American Humanist Association will go public on Washington, D.C. Metro buses with a godless ad campaign for the winter holidays….
The entire ad campaign will be unveiled at a Washington DC press conference and take the successes and controversies of other prominent humanist campaigns to the next level.
Yeah.
“The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.” Psalm 14:1
So I guess someone that goes around saying “There’s Probably No God. Now Stop Worrying and Enjoy Your Life.” is probably a fool.
Hey, sign me up for the fool brigade!
—
Alan, the one who is in the organization responsible for the ad, asks, in the comments below, this question:
I would like to pose just a simple question, how can one look around at all the earth and say there is no God? It does seem foolish to me.
My response:
I can look around the earth, and I see… the earth.
How does seeing what I see make me a fool, and you seeing what you claim to see (which is something you induce from what you actually see) make you “correct”?
Do you have a better answer for Alan? Does Alan or anyone want to argue my logic? If so, comment below!
Thanks again, Alan, for visiting and letting us know the origin of the ad.
Tags: America, association, atheist, campaign, Christ, god, holiday, human, humanist, Logic, metro, photo, prayer, president, Psalm, theist, truth, UK, war, Washington
Sign me up for the fool brigade, too! Depending on the source, being labeled a fool can be taken as a real compliment.
I’ve been a proud member of the “Fool Brigade” for a long time; call me a fool, I give a rat’s ass.
Do they honestly believe calling us fools will make us change our beliefs into theirs? Or is this message for those who already believe to laugh at all us fools?
Oh well, that’s life. I’ve been called worse.
-Nam
…the wise man says it aloud.
Jesus was raped by George Bush
A fool is someone that refuses to believe in an invisible sky daddy?
bwahahahahahaha.
I am certainly part of THAT fool brigade as well.
Tried for a few hours to find the organization, couldn’t, so either the group is a bit obscure or it was personally funded. I’m currently trying other avenues to find it.
In Matthew 5:22 Jesus says:
“But anyone who says ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.”
So, uhm…yeah. See you in Hell!
1 Corinthians 1:21: “It pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.”
1 Corinthians 4:10: “We are fools for Christ’s sake.”
So… ok.
Psalms 14:1 is the verse they are quoting.
It didn’t take them long to resort to name calling, did it?
Haha, what crap. I’m part of that fool brigade too, eh. What’s wrong with being a fool? At least we have fun.
What a bunch of silly christians…
I am in the organization responsible for the ad. I would like to pose just a simple question, how can one look around at all the earth and say there is no God? It does seem foolish to me.
Alan,
Thanks kindly for commenting so that I could update my post with your information.
As for the answer to your question: I can look around the earth, and I see… the earth.
How does seeing what I see make me a fool, and you seeing what you claim to see (which is something you induce from what you actually see) make you “correct”?
@Mr. Nelson:
First off, I certainly don’t look at the earth and say “there is no God”. Rather than stating unequivocally and closed-mindedly that there is no such thing as a God (or Gods), I simply do not see enough evidence to believe that there is any sort of deity that created our universe.
Now, in response to your question, I would like to ask one of my own. What is it about the earth that has convinced you there is a God? So far, science has shown how a good portion of the world works without the intervention of a deity. While science has not answered every question out there, it has done a good job so far, and I see nothing to suggest that it will not continue explaining things in the future.
Humanity currently has more than adequate explanations for the diversity of life, the origins of the earth, and the development of stars and galaxies. Our knowledge of the origins of life and the origins of the universe are a little fuzzier, but they get better day by day. So, rather than postulating a God of the gaps, I have simply chosen to follow the evidence as we uncover it, and so far, none of that evidence points towards a deity.
Before you go saying that since I don’t outright reject the existence of God, I am not actually an atheist, but more an agnostic, let me clarify some definitions. An agnostic is one who lacks knowledge about a deity, an atheist is one who lacks faith in a deity. There is a clear difference and they are not mutually exclusive. I would postulate that every human alive is agnostic. None of us have knowledge about deities. Some, however, have faith that there is a God (or Gods) while others do not. That is the difference between an atheism and theism, and between agnosticism and gnosticism.
Also, I would like to ask a further question of you. Since the add campaign you are running directly quotes Psalm 14:1, I think it is fair to assume you think that verse is true. What justification do you have for calling atheists fools, other than that the bible says it is so?
Alen, I will pose the same question to you that I pose to all theists. I will even grant you the premise that the world/universe itself is evidence of a Singular Creator of Everything. (I disagree with this notion, by the way.) My question is how do you conclude that this Singular Creator of Everything is synonymous with Yahweh of the Bible? (Beyond simply asserting that they are.)
Apparently this guy has posed my question in a more elegant way:
“If you’re taking ‘We are surrounded by uncertainty’ and arriving at ‘This omnipotent guy in a cloud city told me He hates fags as much as I do,’ I’m afraid you’re going to have to show your work.”
http://www.jaypinkerton.com/haggai.html
I look around the earth and don’t see George Washington, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr, or Shakespeare so does that mean I don’t believe they ever existed? Much like God, proof of their work is all around us regardless of who chooses to see it.
Ergo Ratio, first, I do not believe that a guy up in cloud city told me he hates fags. I believe a guy up in cloud city told me that He loves people. You will not find that I am a Christian who is a hypocrite, I believe we all sin, and God loves all people in spite of their sins. Those who accept that and the forgiveness/salvation He offers through Christ are what I would call Christians. You made an assumption saying that God hates fags and that I hate fags, not cool.
To everyone attempting to answer my last question. Yes, I definitely believe there is a ton of scientific evidence that explains many things in the universe, one would have to be blind to deny that. Without arguing any specific brand of religion I would say that my point earlier was that so many people want to believe solely in the “scientific process” and I’ve never heard an answer as to how it all got started. I believe the answer to that is God said “let it be”. I don’t believe in a God of the gaps, I don’t use God to explain the parts science can’t. Instead I believe that the very fact that there is a complex scientific process at work in everything couldn’t have been the result of random chance, it was the result of an intelligent creator.
Ergo, I see your point, that even if one accepts that there must be a divine creator (I do believe this), how can one settle on Christianity and the Bible. I believe this is where faith comes in. Jesus can’t change your life until you let Him. Once I let Christ be my Lord and not just a divine creator, I experienced truly a new life. I wasn’t brain washed, I wasn’t guilted into it (as I hope you can tell from above, I’m not into the guilting people into a religion) I was simply loved as Christ loved, as He loves everyone, and I wanted more.
I sure wish I had a faith switch I could flip off and on. Wait…no I don’t. Calling me a fool will not magically manifest a faith button in me, or anyone. If there actually IS a god, and it made everything, then if made me, and made me an overly rational thinker incapable of experiencing faith, which is odd, considering said god’s apparent obsession with being worshipped. That makes a hell of a lot less sense than the notion that there isn’t a god at all. How could an all powerful god create the conditions for the rise of atheism? Sounds sloppy to me. Or, more likely, it sounds like what would happen if there were no god at all.
Ursula, I can’t really speak about all religions on this one, I’m just not educated enough on them (if anyone else is, please comment), but I will say something about how Christianity feels about this. I don’t believe that God is a dictator or a tyrant, if He was, then you are absolutely right, He would have just said here are humans and they will worship me. I think the word worship is a bad word to use in this discussion. I think the word love is better. If God is obsessed with anything, it is love. Worship is what we do in response to God’s never ending love for us, it is one way for us to show Him love back. Because God loves us so much he gives us free will to follow Him or not. After all, who would really love someone who forces people to worship them. Because of this free will He has created us with, we get to choose whether to believe in Him or not, we get to choose whether to follow Him or not, we get to choose whether to accept His unending love or not, and we get to choose how we respond to that love, I choose to worship Him because of His love for me.
God allows you free will which allows you to be an atheist. I seriously doubt you are truly incapable of experiencing faith because we can have faith in many things. I don’t want to make any assumptions about you or what you are truly feeling, but it seems that you are more not wanting to believe in a God that forces people to worship Him, we share that in common, that is why I am a Christian.
Ursula, I believe God loves you so much He made you a rational thinker that you could truly decide for yourself to follow Him or not, and not be forced into anything. I believe God loves you so much He gave up His one and only son that if you believe in Him, you will have everlasting life. God loves you whether or not you love Him back, that’s called true love. You have the free will to be an atheist, and you have the free will to give Him a try, trust me, loves not so bad.
To all: In case anyone would like to contact me directly with “rational” discussion, you can find me on myspace at http://www.myspace.com/alannelson. Please remember, I have been very polite and understanding to your beliefs, extend me the same courtesy.
How utterly ironic that they are using the word “fool” in the derogatory sense, when their own book encourages them to be “fools for Christ”. Apparently the word is both an insult to be hurled and a badge of honor to be proudly worn. Must be one of ‘dem “heavenly paradoxes”…
From the updated article:
“A group of us were talking about how we were tired of these attacks…Our goal is that this will have a positive effect and if we reach just one person, the campaign was worth the effort…”
How is someone placing an Ad on a bus an attack on Christians? It wasn’t negative. It didn’t state anything negative. It does the same exact thing as other ads by religious organizations but instead of using God or Jesus (or whatever) as their slogan they use their belief (or non-belief) instead. That’s not an attack; and modern day Christmas hasn’t been about Christianity in who knows how many years. Christmas today is about giving and getting presents, a tree (fake or real) with those presents underneath, lights on the house, and spending time with family and loved ones — now, Christians may think that those are “Chrstian” atrributes but those are human attributes; we give gifts on Birthdays, and special occassions etc., how are Atheists attacking other religions, especially Christianity, if they are just trying to reach people with doubts? It’s more true that the ads in response to the Atheists who have these ads up are attacks on the Atheists than it is the other way around. Freedom of Speech seems to only be for the Christians; I’ve read in articles about how Christians in droves have gotten together to sign petitions, or have complained to the city that they live in that they were offended by the Atheist advert that they saw on the way to work, or on a bus — in a free society why is it that everyone but the Christian should be silenced? That’s not freedom, that’s one group of people dictating what others should be doing or saying since they think they run everything. Christians in the U.S. seem to have their foot in a lot of places that supress the other side (or any side but their own or an opposing Christian faction) but when it comes to people speaking out for what they believe in; it’s an attack on the Christians.
No, this is an attack on you Christians; and I want you to pay very close to what I’m about to say to you so you can understand that I’m attacking you, and what the adverts by the Atheists haven’t.
Are you ready?
Okay:
Fuck you.
Did you get that? I hope so. I can say it again if you like, if I wasn’t clear enough? I’m attacking you; what’s your response?
I hear more negative shit by Christians on “positive” tv/radio shows against other religions and non-religions than I do on forums and/or other programs that you would think would be more negativity against Christians (or religion in general) — but on those “positive” channels they do it in a way that perhaps the everyday Christian doesn’t know is negative or perhaps they do and they agree with it, and therefore do not care.
This isn’t about if God exists or not, everyone should know that. This is about who has the right to say what’s on their mind; and if the free society they live in will allow it. There have been several cases where ads have been taken down because they were offensive to the Christian — I haven’t seen one ad been taken down made by Christians that have offended everyone else. Isn’t that a bit of a double-standard (any Christian reading this can answer)? Doesn’t that send a negative message? Doesn’t that say that Christians can bully anyone they wish without consequence because since there are more of them then there are of anyone else (in the U.S.) that what they do is for the greater good, and what everyone else does isn’t, and therefore anyone who goes against what the majority states is just being negative, and attacking the establishment.
The funny thing is: we’d protect your right to say what you wish where as you wouldn’t protect our right to say what we wish.
Who’s more superior in that view? Who’s more giving in that view? Who’s the positive persons in that view? Certainly not Christians.
You have a right to complain but you do not have a right to make your complaints seem like threats (or actually be threats) and force a company or a city to take down another advert that isn’t breaking any laws. Christians seem to go out of their way to do this.
That’s all I’m going to say.
-Nam
“Without arguing any specific brand of religion I would say that my point earlier was that so many people want to believe solely in the “scientific process” and I’ve never heard an answer as to how it all got started. I believe the answer to that is God said “let it be”. I don’t believe in a God of the gaps, I don’t use God to explain the parts science can’t. Instead I believe that the very fact that there is a complex scientific process at work in everything couldn’t have been the result of random chance, it was the result of an intelligent creator.”
First of all, atheism has absolutely nothing to do with believing in “random chance,” as you put it. It has everything to do with realizing that our speculation and assumptions, as humans, is rather meaningless. This is not to say that we cannot know anything, that would be absurd, but the things that we have figured out are the results of using science, a method that lets the universal laws make the “assumptions,” we merely test them and developed theories that agree with the results. We are merely products of the universe, our brains are products of the universe, we are merely complex relations of matter and energy. Now, any assumptions that we make are thus not actual reflections of the way reality ‘works,’ just the prejudices that arise from how are brains are “wired.”
Some common assumptions that fall under this category are “the universe couldn’t have come from nothing,” “there couldn’t have been an infinite regress,” and, finally, the assumption that “the very fact that there is a complex scientific process at work in everything couldn’t have been the result of random chance, it was the result of an intelligent creator.” The same could have been, and was, said for the existence of diverse life on earth, specifically, humans. The assumption was made that this couldn’t have arose from, as the religious love to put, ‘random chance.’ They concluded that it thus must have been an “intelligent creator.” This was, of course, a meaningless assumption, and it is no different from your statement, that “the very fact that there is a complex scientific process at work in everything couldn’t have been the result of random chance, it was the result of an intelligent creator.” Your assumption is meaningless speculation, and that is in no way a rational method to determine anything about the nature of the universe, much less it’s origins.
Secondly, if you applied your “logic” consistently, you would realize that the same could easily be said for this ‘creator’ that you postulate. For, if this God could have given rise to the universe, and all the “complex scientific processes” within it, this God would have to be at least ‘advanced’ enough to do this. If the universe demands an intelligent creator, surely, the state of said creator can not just be a ’simple’ thing, either. It must be at least complex enough to think of all these processes, and definitely powerful enough to create them. So I ask – if we applied the logic, i.e., the inference that complex scientific processes demand an intelligent creator, consistently, would we not come to the same conclusion for the creator, i.e., that it’s existence demands an intelligent creator as well? How far shall we take it – an infinite regress of Gods, eventually leading up to this universe? This is the conclusion that would arise from the consistent application of your ‘logic,’ but it is, once again, a meaningless assumption, not to mention it is a flagrant violation of the law of parsimony ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor ).
Quote:
“Ergo Ratio, first, I do not believe that a guy up in cloud city told me he hates fags. I believe a guy up in cloud city told me that He loves people. You will not find that I am a Christian who is a hypocrite, I believe we all sin, and God loves all people in spite of their sins. Those who accept that and the forgiveness/salvation He offers through Christ are what I would call Christians. You made an assumption saying that God hates fags and that I hate fags, not cool.”
The assumption is that as a Christian you use the Bible as your guide. I am not an expert in the content of the Bible, but I understand that there are some decidedly anti-gay passages in it. In addition, there are modern day sects of Christianity that are vocally anti-gay. It is a reasonable assumption that you fall into that category. If not, then you are an exception….or gay.
Quote:
“Instead I believe that the very fact that there is a complex scientific process at work in everything couldn’t have been the result of random chance, it was the result of an intelligent creator.”
This looks like a derivative of the argument from design, or teleological argument. It basically is stated like this: since the world and humans are so complex, then there must be something that created it. The problem is that the argument is correlative in nature. An example is, “the rock you brought me is warm, so it must be sunny outside”. The rock being warm can mean it’s sunny, but it can also be warmed by other means. It could have simply been warmed in a pocket. The simpler explanation is most often the correct explanation.
Quote:
“Ergo, I see your point, that even if one accepts that there must be a divine creator (I do believe this), how can one settle on Christianity and the Bible. I believe this is where faith comes in. Jesus can’t change your life until you let Him. Once I let Christ be my Lord and not just a divine creator, I experienced truly a new life. I wasn’t brain washed, I wasn’t guilted into it (as I hope you can tell from above, I’m not into the guilting people into a religion) I was simply loved as Christ loved, as He loves everyone, and I wanted more.”
I tried Christianity. My results differed dramatically. Why is your self-inculcation immune to outside input? For instance, I do not feel ANY of that love that is supposedly for ‘everyone’. That bit of knowledge alone should cause you to stop and think about your position because it is diametrically opposed to your statement. To build on that a bit, what about the billions of Chinese that are not Christian? And as you point out, what about all of the Muslims? Why isn’t their religion correct? I would argue that you and the Muslims are equally INcorrect. Logic and evidence are on my side.
Welcome to the beating Alan. I commend you on your willingness to join us, knowing you will be the focus of the discussion here. As others have already pointed out great arguments against your assertions I’ll not repeat them. But I would like to point out this.
Quote;
Without arguing any specific brand of religion I would say that my point earlier was that so many people want to believe solely in the “scientific process” and I’ve never heard an answer as to how it all got started. I believe the answer to that is God said “let it be”. I don’t believe in a God of the gaps, I don’t use God to explain the parts science can’t. Instead I believe that the very fact that there is a complex scientific process at work in everything couldn’t have been the result of random chance, it was the result of an intelligent creator.
In that statement alone you contradicted yourself. You say you don’t believe in the ‘GOD of the gaps’, yet where science has yet to explain something you jumped straight to GOD for the answer. So which is it?
And I think this is where us rationalists and you religious folk differ the most. Where we are not content with GOD as the answer for all we don’t understand (Thus continuing to unravel the mysteries of what we don’t understand), you lazily say “GOD DID IT!” (And in doing so, you cease all attempts to bring reason to the chaos that is all around us.)
So, Alen, your answer is–as I expected–nothing more than a bare assertion. I don’t suppose you’d care to retract your support for the “fool” verse.
Alan wrote, “I believe God loves you so much He made you a rational thinker that you could truly decide for yourself to follow Him or not, and not be forced into anything.”
If a parent told their child, “I would like you to clean your room. But if you don’t, I’m going to set you on fire. It’s your choice.” Is that really a choice? Is that really a loving, benevolent parent?
“Please remember, I have been very polite and understanding to your beliefs, extend me the same courtesy.”
On here you have been ok. You also called us all fools in front of an entire city. Not exactly polite.
Regardless, I don’t condone being a “fuck you” atheist because while it might feel good, atheists who are assholes are as easy a target for the indoctrinated as say, Bill O’Riley is to us. It’s easy to hate an asshole. It’s much harder to write someone off who you were taught to disagree with, but who you can’t help but like.
Talking down to people also supports the idea that religions have a monopoly on love. Feel free to re-read all of Alan’s comments above with this concept in mind and consider why the religious are taught to use the word love so much in relation to their beliefs. (Hint: if your thoughts on this are only about being safe from criticism keep thinking, that’s only part of it)
i wish people would mind their own business.
I am not a part of the “fool brigade”.
… I don’t accept their views on theology, morality, history or the nature of the universe. Why would I accept their views on intelligence, wisdom and redefinitions of the English language?
This is sad that they take our stance that there isn’t a god and turn it around to call it anti-christian.
Sad, hypocritical, unconstitutional, and just plain wrong.