The separation of church and state is fundamental to this nation, it is a key reason for the founding of it and why we left Europe. Someone being tried who is not a Christian will feel quite oppressed staring at the ten commandments while being tried as it states, clearly, that it is a Christian court that they are in. Not acceptable in this nation and could not be farther from the truth.

I have not made my video yet, my health has been bad for the last few days. As soon as I am able, I will, DVD or not, Wolf.

I disagree. Posting the Magna Carta wouldn't make it a British Court, posting the Ten Commandments does not make it a Christian Court. Both are documents showing the evolution of law, not laws under which the court functions.

It might be an indication they will follow established rules that have been accepted legal system and not making up shit as they go along, to suit their personal prejudices. :cool:

I'm not sure what you mean by that. The ten commandments have nothing to do with the US judicial system.

It seems to me like those videos say a lot.

This Blasphemy Challenge is not a community building or support exercise in particular. It appears to me to be a confrontational display of arrogance and superiority.

Why not apply this effort to a national campaign of tolerance and understanding? I think that many atheists would rather remain a persecuted and misunderstood minority.

My 2c.

--Joe

And by making every Christian value into law and expecting everyone to abide to you is not a display of arrogance and superiority?

Nawwww... and disowning your kids or telling them they are going to burn in hell/not be a good person if they don't BELIEVE isn't either.
Let's not be SILLY!

The ten commandments (or 15 if you believe Mel Brooks) are not Christian. They pre-date Jesus by a considerable span of time and are referenced in varying degrees by Christians, Jews and Muslims alike and so could not possibly offend any member of the big three religions.

I could argue that they couldn't offend any member of any non-big-three religion since the god speaking the commandments would simply be the god they worship.

I could also argue that they couldn't offend a member of a multithiestic religion since even Christianity has multiple versions of its god. And Christianity has obviously conjured up some tortured theological workaround to accommodate the "worship" of the virgin Mary thereby setting a precedent for a multi-deity bonanza.

I could further argue that the commandments couldn't even offend an atheist since only the first commandment deals with god himself. Since atheists do not believe in god they are not technically violating the first edict (the first commandment is actually a statement and two commandments) since they don't worship or idolize something in place of god. In addition, there is no law on the books referencing the first commandment nor does the first commandment instruct anyone, atheists or otherwise, to do anything they aren't already doing (either worshiping the god they think wrote the commandments or not worshiping some other god or idol in its place). So everyone is safe so far.

The second commandment requires upholding the Sabbath. Since no one really knows what the hell that means, I think its safe to say that no one should be intimidated or offended by that edict. Anyway, courthouses are closed on Sunday so the odds that anyone reading it at the courthouse might have occasion to wonder if the mere act of reading it violates it are zero. Offended party count: zero.

The third commandment (not using the Lord's name in vein), like the first and second is personal and whether or not one has violated it is difficult to determine and is well outside the court's jurisdiction. Atheists are incapable of violating the third commandment since the mere act of denouncing god implicitly requires them to acknowledge he exists. So any atheist who denounces god has inadvertently denounced his own atheism and is now a defacto non-atheist. Which faith he now belongs to is a matter of some debate. True atheists understand this and have no problem with commandment three.

Commandment 4, honor your parents, is just plain good advice. Anyone want to step up and claim it offends them? I didn't think so.

Commandments 5-8 prohibit murder, theft, perjury and adultery. Three of those are codified into law and one is a basis for civil action. So there is good reason to have those posted. Unless, of course, someone wants to make the argument that having laws that parallel the commandments, in fact, violates the mandatory separation of church and state and therefore, constitutes prima fascia grounds to have those laws stricken from the books. Anyone want to sign up for that? Anyone? Bueller?

The last two commandments prohibit envy. Anyone offended by that is probably themselves offensive.

I'll conclude by saying that I'm not trying to be condescending or arrogant or anything other than reasoned. I just fail to see what the BFP (big freaking problem) is with posting the commandments in a courthouse and scoff at the idea that they violate either someone's freedom of religion or someone's sense of entitlement to freedom from religion.

And for those who are just dead set against it, logic be damned, I'll leave you with this thought: if the judge even references them you can get the case against you dismissed so, ironically, they might even come to your defense someday. Imagine that: the ten commandments as a Get-Out-Of-Jail-Free card. Now that is offensive.

From what book are the courts getting these commandments, the exact wording, specifically?

Regardless of that, separation of church and state means any church.

Separation of church and state. Not separation of religion and state. The whole idea of this was a rebellion against the Church of England. I think its a bit of a stretch to allege that a copy of the non-church specific ten commandments on public property is as egregious as a state-sponsored church. Unless you are making the "slippery slope" argument in which case I'll point out that two tablets in the courthouse lobby over a 250 year period isn't exactly a greased pig on a waterslide.

http://members.cox.net/xycof/floridaTag.jpg

Nothing further, your honor.

No it wouldn't. The Ten Commandments are explicitly associated with Jehovah. And commandments one, two, and three are explicitly religious, and Abrahamaic, in nature, whether or not you know "what the hell that means."

You certainly did damn up some logic.

In fact, I'm not being silly.

You would imply with your posts that I said Christians do not display arrogance or superiority, when it is clear that I said nothing of the sort. My focus was clearly on the actions, options, and opportunities of atheists.

My point is this. rkzenrage, you defended this Project Blasphemy as a necessary community building and support exercise. However, the means are directly confrontational and offensive.

My question was, why not support a community building exercise that involves education of the public? Use the effort to cast atheists as thoughtful, considerate, and socially responsible equals instead of provocative ne'er-do-wells who give away prizes for blaspheming that which the majority hold so dear.

I suggest that many atheists do not wish to be treated as equal, because such treatment would remove their license to feel superior over others.

PS: I'm not going to defend words that someone else put in my mouth.

--Joe

There is nothing confrontational by just stating your belief or lack thereof.
Theists choose to take it personally, though it is not about them, at all. We care not about that, don't acknowledge it, and have no reason to.
I put no words in your mouth.

There's denotation, and then there's connotation. If you honestly don't believe that this is confrontational, I won't challenge your assessment.

To me, however, it is clear that Brian Flemming is erring on the side of arrogance. Look at the title, "The Blasphemy Challenge". I think we can agree that blasphemy is a connotatively negative word. Challenge is at once a celebration of skill and an invitation. Why choose an offensive word to revel in, when there are plenty of denotative synonyms? Why not the "Atheist Affirmation Project" or something similar? Why must you specifically flaunt scripture in order to 'rise to the challenge' and 'win a fabulous prize'.

If this is purely about supporting a community, shouldn't you just be able to say, "I've been an atheist since I was 13," or, "I don't feel like I can tell anyone else, but I've never really felt the need to believe in God." Instead you must deny the existence of God, often by relegating him to the class of non-existent entities which defined your childhood.

rkzenrage, you did not put words in my mouth. You responded to words that had been put in my mouth. (;

--Joe

There's a cloyingly sweet little tale that's almost universal... in response to a child asking, if there's Mother's Day and Father's Day, why isn't there a Children's Day? And the parent replies, Every day is Children's Day.

Well I'm here to tell you: Every Day is Christian's Day.

You may not have been aware of this.

Y'see, when Linus goes into the speech about the Real Meaning of Christmas, non-Christians don't say anything.

When someone at a dinner says first let us bow our heads and say grace, almost all of us politely bow our heads and pretend to pray. We may even say Amen.

For two years, I worked for an employer that put "Reverence for God and all His Works" into their Official Company List of Values. I just shut up, did a good job and collected my paycheck.

So now you find the name of this thing to be a little in-your-face? How DARE people actively proclaim that they don't agree with you!

Well you poor thing! How hard it must be for you! Let me call you the WAAAAAHBULANCE!!!

http://cellar.org/2007/waaaambulance.jpg

I guess I should consider myself 'pwned' by your invocation of the 'WAAAAAHBULANCE!!!'

I think you misunderstand my argument.

I am not attempting to suggest an 'equivalent' response to Christianity. I am not attempting to circumscribe the 'rights' of atheists. My argument does not depend upon the actions of Christians, and hence your objections are invalid.

You see arrogance? I do not think that arrogance should be met with arrogance. I think that this is true in general, and I think that it is particularly true in the case of this 'atheist PR crisis.' My personal feelings aside, I'm trying to suggest a prudent, responsible and effective course for atheists.

I don't remember establishing that they disagree with me.

--Joe

Edit: Image removed from quote.

Welcome, KGZ. You've come to the right place.

Loved your analysis. Nice work, buddy.

And I am showing the other side. Yes, some atheists will show arrogance but every religion does that so don't pick out atheists when everyone is doing it.

This is horrible logic. Every religion has people that feel superior to others. Every religion would be doing the same thing atheists are doing right now, so that is human nature. Don't accuse atheists of doing something that everyone does.

Are you saying that atheists should be respectful of all religions when all others have free reign. You are making a double standard for Christians and you can't do that. You can't just point out atheist's mistakes and ignore Christians.

How can you deny the holy spirit without being confrontational? They are saying that they do not believe in the holy spirit. You do not have to watch it and you have to respect other people's views.

piercehawkeye,

It's preposterous to suggest that I've created a double standard. Where have a I set a standard for Christians or any other group?

Why am I discussing atheists in general and The Blasphemy Project specifically? That's the topic of this thread. Furthermore, the righteous do not act in kind to their antagonists; they act righteously.

What would be a non-confrontational way to proclaim yourself an atheist? I answered this above:

An intentionally confrontational method to encourage others to deny God would be producing a video which begins by establishing the profound importance of proper Christianity, and then ridiculing that proposition by encouraging people to damn themselves eternally in exchange for a video.

--Joe

Who said it was about building a community? It's all about making a point. The video is irrelevant. There are over 2000 responses now -- withonly the first 1000 getting a video -- so further video-making won't earn anyone a video.

In Soviet Russia, the posts search for YOU!

Ah thanks. Well, I disagree with rk. It's all about making a point.

I'm very faith-friendly. Mostly because the people who raised me, and to whom I owe a huge debt of gratitude, still practise their faith.

But this post is outstanding for me in its candour, its clarity and in stating the facts exactly as I live them. And courtesy. Until the ambulance - but that was funny.

Thanks UT - this message is now filed away.

Undertoad,

If you want to make a point, I won't challenge you. The Blasphemy Challenge is the appropriate medium. (;

just because i hate it when my posts land at the bottom of a page, and then someone posts right after....and i think no one saw what i posted.....and i am seeing a new guy make more sense than anyone else ( KGZ) ...i want to reiterate:

There is no Blashpemy if you are truly atheistic. It's just pissing on the Christians. The same thing we (as atheists or agnostics) resent them for. So how is this helping? Are you hoping to convert people to your lack of a church? Are you truly being altruisticly motivated to 'rescue them' from brainwashing?

If they want to believe in Christianity, or Hinduism, or Islam, or whatevvvvver....fuck 'em. leave them to it. just require that they pay you the same respect. You don't have to get all up in their face and act out like some kind of rebelious teenager. You're not going to change their minds.

So why do I always argue with mrnoodle? cuz i like to. And if you like making videos that so daringly damn your everliving soul.....for the rush? don't claim to be atheistic, cuz yer not!

You have done it by not setting a standard.

Yes, this video can be confrontational and I won't avoid that fact, but it does have some justification. Christians have forced their religion onto everyone and this is just atheists pushing back. I would like to see an atheist go onto national television and briefly explain what atheism is and get rid of the stereotypes but that won't happen because that person would never get aired. It would be like trying to set up a sit in protest when you can't even get into the restaurant.

It sounds like we've found an area of agreement. (;

Since I apparently was not entirely clear, I did not discuss the actions of Christians for the purpose of focus. Atheists should be righteous, Christians should be righteous, everyone should be righteous. And in a world where any group is not, I understand that this rather challenges the options of the opposition.

--Joe

1. Others will be emboldened, encouraged, and liberated.

2. Some ARE 100% sure!

3. Freedom baby!

Exactly, just like you will never hear on television that there are nineteen states where it is illegal to hold office as an atheist.

Jim, did you even read the previous posts or is that a tail-post?

I read the whole thread, hammer. did you not understand my point?

No I did not and that is why I asked if you read the thread is because I, and others, stated multiple times that this was not about xians in any way, not for them and has nothing to do with them.
That they do not like the language or anything else to do with the challenge is irrelevant.
It is not for them.

really?

anyway, my point was that blasphemy is only blasphemy if you actually do believe.

It is accepted as a society that God does exists so it would be blasphemy on sociological sense and not personal which is the point of the video.

so, then it's just being shitty. ok. have fun with it.

Exactly, but the egocentric are going to always see the world filtered through themselves and cannot see it any way else.
"This is about me because I choose for it to be. I choose to be offended, so it is offensive".

I don't understand why people have to say nasty things about religion. What harm has religion ever done? (Can we keep politics out of it, and not mention Iraq, or Isreal, or the whole Middle East for that matter?)

Politics frequently is religion, and vice versa. But I'm sure you know that. :eyebrow:

Ask homosexuals or any other minority what religion has done.

I don't mind religion at its base, just when people start forcing their religion on other people is when I start getting annoyed of it.

Suppressing science and knowledge, casting the world into a dark age... hmmm, who was that again?

You?

Take it easy. I don't think he was expecting an inquisition.

Oh, and I forgot to mention Bosnia. And Sudan. And Spain. And the British Isles... and North, Central and South America. And the Near East and Far East.

Ok, you've convinced me - I deny the Holy Spirit.

Smites Thee

Dammit, you beat me to it.

I call the next one.

Oh, come ON people. Was it too easy? I set that up beautifully. Spike the ball!

It even answers his question.

yup, too easy.....i thought the joke had been made as it was.

This is a joke right? I'm a little dense.:redface:

Yes. I'm sorry - I meant to say: religion equals +-(:-) and :behead: and :apistola: and :skull: and :reaper: and :dead: and :scream: and :fsm: , except that my finger slipped.

Nice.

Damn, the time I decide not to ask if it is a joke or not it is a joke....just my luck.

The Inquisition (Let's begin)
The Inquisition (Look out sin)
We have a mission to convert the Jews (Jew, Jew, Jew, Jew, Jew, Jew, Jew)
We're gonna teach them wrong from right.
We're gonna help them see the light
and make an offer that they can't refuse. (That those Jews just can't refuse)
Confess, don't be boring.
Say yes, don't be dull.
A fact you're ignoring:
It's better to lose your skull cap than your skull (or your govalt!)
The Inquisition (what a show)
The Inquistion (here we go)
We know you're wishin' that we'd go away.
But the Inquisition's here and it's here to stay!

"I was sitting in a temple. I was minding my own business.
I was listening to a lovely Hebrew mass.
Then these Papus persons plungered and they throw me in a dungeon and they shove a red hot poker up my ass.
Is that considerate? Is that polite?
And not a tube of Preperation H in sight!"

"I'm sittin' flickin' chickens and I'm lookin' throught the pickins' and suddenly thes goyim pull down valls.
I didn't even know them and they grabbed my by the stoghum and started playing ping pong with my balls!
Ooh, the agony! Ooh, the shame!
To make my privates public for a game?"

The Inquisition (what a show)
The Inquisition (here we go)
We know you're wishin' that we'd go away.
But the Inquisition's here and it's here to-
"Hey Toquemada, walk this way."
"I just got back from the Auto-de-fe."
"Auto-de-fe? What's an Auto-de-fe?"
"It's what you oughtn't to do but you do anyway."
Will you convert? "No, no, no, no."
Will you confess? "No, no, no, no."
Will you revert? "No, no, no, no."
Will you say yes? "No, no, no, no!"
Now I asked in a nice way, I said, "Pretty please."
I bent their ears, now I'll work on their knees!
"Hey Toquemada, walk this way. We got a little game that you might wanna play, so pull that handle, try you're luck."
"Who knows, Toq, you might win a buck!"

"How we doin', any converts today?"
"Not a one, nay, nay, nay."
"We flattened their fingers, we branded their buns!
Nothing is working! Send in the nuns!"

The Inquisition, what a show.
The Inquisition, here we go.
We know you're wishin' that we'd go away!
So all you Muslims and you Jews
We got big news for all of yous:
You'd better change your point of views TODAY!
'Cause the Inquisition's here and it's here to stay!

GOD LOVES YOU ! REPENT!
 

initiative_omega@yahoo.com"The time has come," Jesus said. "The kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe the good news!"
"Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near."
16"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son. 19This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. 20Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. 21But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what he has done has been done through God.

We've been having a run on religious nutters at work, too.