There are no rules in this culture that we are expected to conform to because we've been told they've been laid down by God.
I don't normally make sweeping statements like this, but I really can't think of any.
But say there are, and to take the parents analogy: you are told, for example: You can't be gay, god says so. The only counterpoint to this is not 'there is no god'.
When I first started drinking, I had a lot of beer and threw up. I knew that drinking a lot of beer was not good. I was faced with several options: 1. Give up alcohol. 2. Try different kinds of alcohol 3. Drink less beer.
If you want to liberate people you need to show them all of their options.
There are no rules in this culture that we are expected to conform to because we've been told they've been laid down by God.
Tell that to people who are pushed into arranged marriages, cut off by their families because they are gay, demonised over abortion, or picketed because religious people didn't like the art they produced.
All of these things happen now, because some cultures in the UK believe that God(s) have commanded it.
I'm not sure how the gayness example and the alcohol example tie into each other. Are you saying that gayness made you throw up, so you decided to cut down?
I'm sorry you're quite right I was trying to write down too many things at once and didn't finish my original point before making my next one.
Or possibly decided that alcohol was a better analogy actually - so just ignore the gay bit. Sorry.
I suppose that by the statement about culture I meant mainstream culture. That's the culture that the campaign is being conducted in.
And I suppose I lumped in family with your 'parents' category.
And what art picketing are you referring to? I think as long as it's peaceful picketing then that's fine. The only example I can draw off the top of my head is when anti-Scientologists picketed Katie Holmes' play - peaceful protest should be allowed. You sound like you have a particular event in mind here?
Picketing an abortion clinic is different because it's an invasion of privacy whereas art by it's very nature is public.
But it still goes back to 'There's probably no God' on a bus isn't going to stop any of this.
I suppose that by the statement about culture I meant mainstream culture. That's the culture that the campaign is being conducted in. But if you want to target a disparate group of people all over the place there's no easier way to do so than to broadcast it generally and hope that it reaches the people you want it to. I mean, I'm sure they'd be happy if they didn't have to pay for it to reach existing atheists - but there's no way of targetting like that.
I'm thinking, in this case, of the picketing of a play about child abuse in a mosque (written by a Moslem woman in this case) and also of Jerry Springer The Musical - both of which had a lot of fuss caused and threats were made.
And I disagree about it not stopping any of this. Sure, sticking it on a bus doesn't have an immediate effect - but then nobody reads a "Smoking Kills" ad and quits on the spot. Instead it slowly affects the norms of society and changes the ideas people consider over time.
'Smoking Kills' adverts are designed to stop people smoking. This campaign is not designed to stop people believing in god (if it is then I really</> have a problem with it!!). The aims is clearer and so the message can be more direct.
I think if people wanted to picket the shows above then that's entirely their right. Threats is a separate issue and is legislated against.
It is intended to stop people believing in God. It's funded by the Humanist Association.
I don't see why people should be discouraged from telling other people what they believe. It seems like a terrible affront to freedom of speech, which is one of those human rights thingies that I'm in favour of.
If that is true then I find it massively massively offensive. However...
It's funded by the Humanist Association.
Is only half true. It's run by the Humanist Association but funded largely through public donations (http://www.justgiving.com/atheistbus)
I don't see why people should be discouraged from telling other people what they believe. They shouldn't. However, neither should people be lied to. Religious belief should always be given as a matter of opinion.
You have hair that is shorter than some and longer than others. Whether it's absolutely "long" or "short" is a matter of opinion depending on cultural context. Either Jesus _is_ the Son of God, or he is not - it's a fact of unknown veracity. It's certainly a matter of opinion whether there's sufficient evidence to support rational belief in it.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2009-01-08 11:01 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-08 11:24 am (UTC)I don't normally make sweeping statements like this, but I really can't think of any.
But say there are, and to take the parents analogy: you are told, for example: You can't be gay, god says so. The only counterpoint to this is not 'there is no god'.
When I first started drinking, I had a lot of beer and threw up. I knew that drinking a lot of beer was not good. I was faced with several options:
1. Give up alcohol.
2. Try different kinds of alcohol
3. Drink less beer.
If you want to liberate people you need to show them all of their options.
no subject
Date: 2009-01-08 11:30 am (UTC)Tell that to people who are pushed into arranged marriages, cut off by their families because they are gay, demonised over abortion, or picketed because religious people didn't like the art they produced.
All of these things happen now, because some cultures in the UK believe that God(s) have commanded it.
I'm not sure how the gayness example and the alcohol example tie into each other. Are you saying that gayness made you throw up, so you decided to cut down?
no subject
Date: 2009-01-08 11:43 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-08 02:41 pm (UTC)Or possibly decided that alcohol was a better analogy actually - so just ignore the gay bit. Sorry.
I suppose that by the statement about culture I meant mainstream culture. That's the culture that the campaign is being conducted in.
And I suppose I lumped in family with your 'parents' category.
And what art picketing are you referring to? I think as long as it's peaceful picketing then that's fine. The only example I can draw off the top of my head is when anti-Scientologists picketed Katie Holmes' play - peaceful protest should be allowed. You sound like you have a particular event in mind here?
Picketing an abortion clinic is different because it's an invasion of privacy whereas art by it's very nature is public.
But it still goes back to 'There's probably no God' on a bus isn't going to stop any of this.
no subject
Date: 2009-01-08 03:18 pm (UTC)But if you want to target a disparate group of people all over the place there's no easier way to do so than to broadcast it generally and hope that it reaches the people you want it to. I mean, I'm sure they'd be happy if they didn't have to pay for it to reach existing atheists - but there's no way of targetting like that.
I'm thinking, in this case, of the picketing of a play about child abuse in a mosque (written by a Moslem woman in this case) and also of Jerry Springer The Musical - both of which had a lot of fuss caused and threats were made.
And I disagree about it not stopping any of this. Sure, sticking it on a bus doesn't have an immediate effect - but then nobody reads a "Smoking Kills" ad and quits on the spot. Instead it slowly affects the norms of society and changes the ideas people consider over time.
no subject
Date: 2009-01-08 04:00 pm (UTC)I think if people wanted to picket the shows above then that's entirely their right. Threats is a separate issue and is legislated against.
no subject
Date: 2009-01-08 04:09 pm (UTC)I don't see why people should be discouraged from telling other people what they believe. It seems like a terrible affront to freedom of speech, which is one of those human rights thingies that I'm in favour of.
no subject
Date: 2009-01-08 04:18 pm (UTC)If that is true then I find it massively massively offensive. However...
It's funded by the Humanist Association.
Is only half true. It's run by the Humanist Association but funded largely through public donations (http://www.justgiving.com/atheistbus)
I don't see why people should be discouraged from telling other people what they believe.
They shouldn't. However, neither should people be lied to. Religious belief should always be given as a matter of opinion.
no subject
Date: 2009-01-08 04:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-08 06:56 pm (UTC)I have short hair. Fact
Jesus is the son of god. Opinion.
no subject
Date: 2009-01-09 08:27 am (UTC)Either Jesus _is_ the Son of God, or he is not - it's a fact of unknown veracity. It's certainly a matter of opinion whether there's sufficient evidence to support rational belief in it.