[Cold Iron]

Camel, on Jan 6 2009, 06:30 AM, said:

Don't actually watch Fox News. I try to be diverse in what I read in terms of news outlets and such. I'll admit I'm not too knowledgeable of the Middle East, just trying to make a point. Sorry if I offended.

No offense at all taken, and I similarly apologise if the fox news comment offended. My point was simply that Iranians are certainly as free to learn about christianity or any other religion as you are to learn about islam. Did you know that Tehran has the second highest rate of cosmetic surgery in the world after LA (link)? In most ways they are a modern nation, with modern values, just like the rest of us. I would question, were I american, why my perception of them was being painted to be something other than the truth.

[Camel]

Cold Iron, on Jan 5 2009, 03:28 PM, said:

Camel, on Jan 6 2009, 06:30 AM, said:

Don't actually watch Fox News. I try to be diverse in what I read in terms of news outlets and such. I'll admit I'm not too knowledgeable of the Middle East, just trying to make a point. Sorry if I offended.

No offense at all taken, and I similarly apologise if the fox news comment offended. My point was simply that Iranians are certainly as free to learn about christianity or any other religion as you are to learn about islam. Did you know that Tehran has the second highest rate of cosmetic surgery in the world after LA (link)? In most ways they are a modern nation, with modern values, just like the rest of us. I would question, were I american, why my perception of them was being painted to be something other than the truth.

You're absolutely right. Iran isn't the type of society I was painting. I should've specified more rural areas in countries that are, shall we say, less safe(?) like Afghanistan, where the religious types tend to make the rules more than a secular government.

[Cold Iron]

Camel, on Jan 7 2009, 03:07 AM, said:

You're absolutely right. Iran isn't the type of society I was painting. I should've specified more rural areas in countries that are, shall we say, less safe(?) like Afghanistan, where the religious types tend to make the rules more than a secular government.

The meaning of religion in a country like Afghanistan is lost on modern westerners. When two thirds of the population live in poverty, are illiterate and face the daily threat of displacement or death due to 6 generations of near constant war with the west and thousands of years of infighting and conquering by various empires and warlords, religion becomes a sustaining force to build your life and your family around.

In other words it is incorrect to imply that the peoples of Afghanistan are prevented from learning about foreign religions and customs by some jealous village imam or sheikh. Freedom of education means nothing when there is no education. Solidarity and unity are vital for survival.

This post has been edited by Cold Iron: 06 January 2009 - 09:59 PM

[Camel]

Cold Iron, on Jan 6 2009, 03:59 PM, said:

In other words it is incorrect to imply that the peoples of Afghanistan are prevented from learning about foreign religions and customs by some jealous village imam or sheikh. Freedom of education means nothing when there is no education. Solidarity and unity are vital for survival.

That's precisely my point. No education system means these people don't have the option of learning of other religions. They're going to be whatever the community is because that's all they know.

My argument to Gem was that there is an illusion of free will surrounding religion. Do we really have free will to choose that? How much of that "choice" is dictated by where we live, by who our friends are, by what religion/sect/denomination our family is? How can that possibly be "free will" if it's basically pre-determined by environment?

One of my views in terms of religion is that, if there is a God, He doesn't care. I'm at work right now, so I don't have time to go into the long, detailed version of my theory, but basically... if there was only one way to God, I think it'd be a lot more obvious than it is right now, and we wouldn't be having this debate. So either there's one true way and 90% of the world is going to Hell, there is no God, or God doesn't care (the way mainstream religions suggest that He does, anyway).

[Cold Iron]

Camel, on Jan 8 2009, 02:38 AM, said:

That's precisely my point. No education system means these people don't have the option of learning of other religions. They're going to be whatever the community is because that's all they know.

My argument to Gem was that there is an illusion of free will surrounding religion. Do we really have free will to choose that? How much of that "choice" is dictated by where we live, by who our friends are, by what religion/sect/denomination our family is? How can that possibly be "free will" if it's basically pre-determined by environment?

I understand what you are saying but this is not exactly an issue of free will in the sense that it is usually dicussed, and really has nothing to do with level of education. You and I have access to world class education and yet we are equally ignorant of the vast majority of gods and religions that have existed throughout time.

Camel, on Jan 8 2009, 02:38 AM, said:

One of my views in terms of religion is that, if there is a God, He doesn't care. I'm at work right now, so I don't have time to go into the long, detailed version of my theory, but basically... if there was only one way to God, I think it'd be a lot more obvious than it is right now, and we wouldn't be having this debate. So either there's one true way and 90% of the world is going to Hell, there is no God, or God doesn't care (the way mainstream religions suggest that He does, anyway).

I think in the age of globalism, the concept of "only one way to god" needs to be discarded. My view is that the hard part isn't knowing what is the right path to god, but actually walking it.

This post has been edited by Cold Iron: 07 January 2009 - 11:24 PM

[Camel]

Cold Iron, on Jan 7 2009, 05:24 PM, said:

I understand what you are saying but this is not exactly an issue of free will in the sense that it is usually dicussed, and really has nothing to do with level of education. You and I have access to world class education and yet we are equally ignorant of the vast majority of gods and religions that have existed throughout time.

Sure it is. If I don't have a choice, then I don't have free will. You and I choose not to educate ourselves in the vast majority of gods and religions that have existed through time, whereas Click-click Clackit-cluck in the Brazilian Jungle doesn't have that option and therefore doesn't have the free will to make such a decision.

Cold Iron, on Jan 7 2009, 05:24 PM, said:

I think in the age of globalism, the concept of "only one way to god" needs to be discarded. My view is that the hard part isn't knowing what is the right path to god, but actually walking it.

Agreed. This is my main problem with religion. The downside to that is that you'll never convince the general religious public that this is so.

[Terez]

Anyone ever seen an ad that says "Jesus Loves You"? I have. Anyone ever seen an ad that says "For god probably so loved the world that he probably sent his only begotten son, that whosoever believeth in him shall probably have everlasting life."? Me either...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090108/wl_uk...rtise_newsmlmmd

Christians demand proof for atheist ad claims in Britain

AFP/File – Comedy writer Ariane Sherine, 28, poses in front of a London bus displaying an advertising campaign she …

LONDON (AFP) – Angry Christians have protested to Britain's advertising watchdog over an atheist ad campaign claiming "there's probably no God" on the sides of buses, asking for proof, they said Thursday.

The campaign, featuring slogans plastered on some 800 buses across the country and in London's subway system, was launched this month backed by the British Humanist Association (BHA).

It was thought up by a comedy writer and financed by more than 140,000 pounds (200,000 dollars, 150,000 euros) in public donations.

But Stephen Green, national director of the Christian Voice lobby group, has complained to the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), saying the ads breach its codes on substantiation and truthfulness.

"It is given as a statement of fact and that means it must be capable of substantiation if it is not to break the rules," he said.

"There is plenty of evidence for God, from people's personal experience, to the complexity, interdependence, beauty and design of the natural world.

"But there is scant evidence on the other side, so I think the advertisers are really going to struggle to show their claim is not an exaggeration or inaccurate, as the ASA code puts it," he added.

The ads were the brainchild of comedy writer Ariane Sherine, who objected to Christian adverts on some London buses that carried an Internet address warning that people who rejected God would spend eternity in "torment in hell."

Sherine, 28, sought five-pound donations towards a "reassuring" counter-advertisement and won support from the BHA and atheist campaigner Professor Richard Dawkins.

"You wait ages for an atheist bus, then 800 come along at once. I hope they'll brighten people's days and make them smile on their way to work," she said.

British Humanist Association head Hanne Stinson said it was not taking the Christian Voice complaint seriously.

"I've sought advice from some of our key people here, but I'm afraid all I've got out of them so far is peals of laughter," she said.

An ASA spokesman said: "We have accepted the complaint. We have logged it and we are going to be assessing it over the next couple of days and from that assessment we'll decide whether to contact the advertiser."

[Illuyankas]

Terez, on Jan 8 2009, 08:13 PM, said:

Anyone ever seen an ad that says "Jesus Loves You"? I have. Anyone ever seen an ad that says "For god probably so loved the world that he probably sent his only begotten son, that whosoever believeth in him shall probably have everlasting life."? Me either...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090108/wl_uk...rtise_newsmlmmd

Christians demand proof for atheist ad claims in Britain

AFP/File – Comedy writer Ariane Sherine, 28, poses in front of a London bus displaying an advertising campaign she …

LONDON (AFP) – Angry Christians have protested to Britain's advertising watchdog over an atheist ad campaign claiming "there's probably no God" on the sides of buses, asking for proof, they said Thursday.

The campaign, featuring slogans plastered on some 800 buses across the country and in London's subway system, was launched this month backed by the British Humanist Association (BHA).

It was thought up by a comedy writer and financed by more than 140,000 pounds (200,000 dollars, 150,000 euros) in public donations.

But Stephen Green, national director of the Christian Voice lobby group, has complained to the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), saying the ads breach its codes on substantiation and truthfulness.

"It is given as a statement of fact and that means it must be capable of substantiation if it is not to break the rules," he said.

"There is plenty of evidence for God, from people's personal experience, to the complexity, interdependence, beauty and design of the natural world.

"But there is scant evidence on the other side, so I think the advertisers are really going to struggle to show their claim is not an exaggeration or inaccurate, as the ASA code puts it," he added.

The ads were the brainchild of comedy writer Ariane Sherine, who objected to Christian adverts on some London buses that carried an Internet address warning that people who rejected God would spend eternity in "torment in hell."

Sherine, 28, sought five-pound donations towards a "reassuring" counter-advertisement and won support from the BHA and atheist campaigner Professor Richard Dawkins.

"You wait ages for an atheist bus, then 800 come along at once. I hope they'll brighten people's days and make them smile on their way to work," she said.

British Humanist Association head Hanne Stinson said it was not taking the Christian Voice complaint seriously.

"I've sought advice from some of our key people here, but I'm afraid all I've got out of them so far is peals of laughter," she said.

An ASA spokesman said: "We have accepted the complaint. We have logged it and we are going to be assessing it over the next couple of days and from that assessment we'll decide whether to contact the advertiser."

I laughed until I hurt my jaw.

[Camel]

Illuyankas, on Jan 8 2009, 02:14 PM, said:

Terez, on Jan 8 2009, 08:13 PM, said:

Anyone ever seen an ad that says "Jesus Loves You"? I have. Anyone ever seen an ad that says "For god probably so loved the world that he probably sent his only begotten son, that whosoever believeth in him shall probably have everlasting life."? Me either...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090108/wl_uk...rtise_newsmlmmd

Christians demand proof for atheist ad claims in Britain

AFP/File – Comedy writer Ariane Sherine, 28, poses in front of a London bus displaying an advertising campaign she …

LONDON (AFP) – Angry Christians have protested to Britain's advertising watchdog over an atheist ad campaign claiming "there's probably no God" on the sides of buses, asking for proof, they said Thursday.

The campaign, featuring slogans plastered on some 800 buses across the country and in London's subway system, was launched this month backed by the British Humanist Association (BHA).

It was thought up by a comedy writer and financed by more than 140,000 pounds (200,000 dollars, 150,000 euros) in public donations.

But Stephen Green, national director of the Christian Voice lobby group, has complained to the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), saying the ads breach its codes on substantiation and truthfulness.

"It is given as a statement of fact and that means it must be capable of substantiation if it is not to break the rules," he said.

"There is plenty of evidence for God, from people's personal experience, to the complexity, interdependence, beauty and design of the natural world.

"But there is scant evidence on the other side, so I think the advertisers are really going to struggle to show their claim is not an exaggeration or inaccurate, as the ASA code puts it," he added.

The ads were the brainchild of comedy writer Ariane Sherine, who objected to Christian adverts on some London buses that carried an Internet address warning that people who rejected God would spend eternity in "torment in hell."

Sherine, 28, sought five-pound donations towards a "reassuring" counter-advertisement and won support from the BHA and atheist campaigner Professor Richard Dawkins.

"You wait ages for an atheist bus, then 800 come along at once. I hope they'll brighten people's days and make them smile on their way to work," she said.

British Humanist Association head Hanne Stinson said it was not taking the Christian Voice complaint seriously.

"I've sought advice from some of our key people here, but I'm afraid all I've got out of them so far is peals of laughter," she said.

An ASA spokesman said: "We have accepted the complaint. We have logged it and we are going to be assessing it over the next couple of days and from that assessment we'll decide whether to contact the advertiser."

I laughed until I hurt my jaw.

That's fucking hilarious

[Terez]

And this, my friends, is the reason why this ad campaign was begun - you can bet the reaction was completely anticipated. Which is why Dawkins favored the ad without the use of the word "probably" - Christians certainly don't use qualifiers when they proselytize.

[Cold Iron]

Camel, on Jan 9 2009, 02:12 AM, said:

Sure it is. If I don't have a choice, then I don't have free will. You and I choose not to educate ourselves in the vast majority of gods and religions that have existed through time, whereas Click-click Clackit-cluck in the Brazilian Jungle doesn't have that option and therefore doesn't have the free will to make such a decision.

No. The free will debate is about whether or not humans actually have the capacity to make choices that are not predetermined or if it is simply an illusion. The majority of gods and religions that have existed throughout time have vanished to all records and recollections, we do not choose not to learn about them, we can't, but this doesn't mean we don't have free will.

Camel, on Jan 9 2009, 02:12 AM, said:

Agreed. This is my main problem with religion. The downside to that is that you'll never convince the general religious public that this is so.

Why do you want to? Does it affect you what others believe?

Terez, on Jan 9 2009, 08:04 AM, said:

And this, my friends, is the reason why this ad campaign was begun - you can bet the reaction was completely anticipated. Which is why Dawkins favored the ad without the use of the word "probably" - Christians certainly don't use qualifiers when they proselytize.

Yep, and by doing the same dumb shit you reduce yourselves to just one more voice in the dumb shit crowd. I fucking hate this campaign, atheists used to have class.

This post has been edited by Cold Iron: 08 January 2009 - 10:25 PM

[Terez]

Cold Iron, on Jan 8 2009, 04:25 PM, said:

Yep, and by doing the same dumb shit you reduce yourselves to just one more voice in the dumb shit crowd. I fucking hate this campaign, atheists used to have class.

Sorry CI, but doing "the same dumb shit" is the only way to get them to realize how dumb it is, and how offensive their proselytizing is to us. These guys aren't in it to have permanent atheist advertising - they're in it to draw attention to how religio-centric society really is. Atheists still have class, which is why we can laugh about it.

[Camel]

Cold Iron, on Jan 8 2009, 04:25 PM, said:

Why do you want to? Does it affect you what others believe?

You bet your ass it does, and it's not limited to religion. This debate isn't so much about religion vs science as it's irrationality vs rationality. It's about people thinking for themselves and asking questions and challenging assumptions, instead of blindly believing what other people or books tell them to believe. It's about not being an idiot.

And this affects all kinds of political issues that affect my friends and me, including issues such as gay marriage and taxes. It affects my friendships and relationships with others. It affects what I have to put up with from retarded assholes on the street.

[Cold Iron]

Terez, on Jan 9 2009, 09:45 AM, said:

Sorry CI, but doing "the same dumb shit" is the only way to get them to realize how dumb it is, and how offensive their proselytizing is to us. These guys aren't in it to have permanent atheist advertising - they're in it to draw attention to how religio-centric society really is. Atheists still have class, which is why we can laugh about it.

I disagree. All it's going to get anybody to realise is that you have an agenda to push, just like they do. You're giving them a common enemy to unite against, it's possibly the single most effective method you could use to bolster their strength. You have gone from a people with better things to do with your time and money to a people with nothing better to do with your time and money.

Do you think you are in some obtuse way fighting terrorism? Or just an arbitrarily annoying social phenomenon?

This post has been edited by Cold Iron: 08 January 2009 - 11:20 PM

[Cold Iron]

Camel, on Jan 9 2009, 10:13 AM, said:

You bet your ass it does, and it's not limited to religion. This debate isn't so much about religion vs science as it's irrationality vs rationality. It's about people thinking for themselves and asking questions and challenging assumptions, instead of blindly believing what other people or books tell them to believe. It's about not being an idiot.

And this affects all kinds of political issues that affect my friends and me, including issues such as gay marriage and taxes. It affects my friendships and relationships with others. It affects what I have to put up with from retarded assholes on the street.

Don't you think it's pretty arrogant to want to impose your views on them?

[Terez]

That isn't what is going on here.

[Cold Iron]

Terez, on Jan 9 2009, 10:34 AM, said:

That isn't what is going on here.

If you have nothing to say why post?

[Terez]

Cold Iron, on Jan 8 2009, 05:37 PM, said:

Terez, on Jan 9 2009, 10:34 AM, said:

That isn't what is going on here.

If you have nothing to say why post?

Sorry, but you're building straw men.

[Cold Iron]

Terez, on Jan 9 2009, 10:39 AM, said:

Cold Iron, on Jan 8 2009, 05:37 PM, said:

Terez, on Jan 9 2009, 10:34 AM, said:

That isn't what is going on here.

If you have nothing to say why post?

Sorry, but you're building straw men.

Well at least that's an accusation we can work with. Please, tell me where is my strawman?

[Terez]

You accused me of wanting to impose my beliefs on others. What is the basis for your accusation?

PS - I already made it perfectly clear that's what the strawman was, when I replied "that's not what's going on here." Reading comprehension fail.

This post has been edited by Terez: 08 January 2009 - 11:45 PM