Politics & Current Events
Dear Community,
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Atheists, Humanists Suffer Persecution Worldwide
I read this article this morning and though most of it was not surprising at all, the line at the end was:
In at least seven U.S. states, constitutional provisions are in place that bar atheists from public office and one state, Arkansas, has a law that bars an atheist from testifying as a witness at a trial, the report said.
Is that true? You can't testify as a witness in a trial in Arkansas if you don't believe in God?
Re: Atheists, Humanists Suffer Persecution Worldwide
Apparently in 1961 SCOTUS ruled all such provisions unconstitutional and unenforceable.
But check this out: http://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/assembly/2009/R/Pages/BillInformation.aspx?measureno=HJR1009
But the war on Christianity, though...
Seriously, this doesn't surprise me either.
SCOTUS also ruled it unconstitutional to outlaw interracial marriage in 1967, but Alabama didn't get around to actually repealing their anti-miscegenation laws until the year 2000 (fun fact: only 59% of Alabamas voted in favor of repealing the law! Yay Alabama!).
It's fairly legitimate for states to not bother repealing laws that have been rendered unconstitutional.
But yeah, despite being something like 5-10% of the population, there is presently ONE US representative and ZERO US Senators who are openly atheist.
If people are ok with someone being atheist they will vote them into office. I don't know that I would in any way consider there being only 1 us representative as indicative of some kind of war on non-believers. When you consider that small portion of the population and then having to whittle down those qualified to seek office then get them elected based on their platform and agenda (fiscal/social policy), it is something of a crapshoot anyway. Just because someone is atheist doesn't mean they can't have some other controversial views. I know atheists who are pro-life. I know atheists who are extremely fiscally conservative. I've certainly come across stories of atheists who are racists and against gay marriage. Like any other segment of the population, you are going to have a mix of views and values.
You'll also get a wide range of views and qualifications from white Christian men but they have no problem dominating politics in this country. Minorities are always underrepresented, it isn't a phenomenon when it comes to non-believers.
A sort of fun group of stats with some going back to the '50s:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/26611/some-americans-reluctant-vote-mormon-72yearold-presidential-candidates.aspx
(this is from '07 but also includes stats from, I saw a stat from Gallup earlier this year that the number has edged over 50% for atheists)
We are making the same point I believe from different perspectives. White men who identify themselves Christians, no matter how loosely, are more populous than any other group (other than women) so it stands to reason that they'd be the largest group in elected office. Women's numbers are skewed by the number of women who leave the work force or political life for family even for a short period of time. While the women are handling things at home the men are getting work experience, name recognition and political clout that gets them ahead with the voters even when those women come back into the picture. White men run the gamut from Democrat to Republican to Libertarian to Independent. This is more a result of population than anything more nefarious.
I pointed out the varying viewpoints because while atheists comprise 5-10% of the population, due to the widespread nature of beliefs and needing a voting base to support you in them, it's not necessarily statistically/politically probable that they would comprise 5-10% of elected office. There are people on the right who will not vote for someone who does not believe it God. Despite popular belief, there are those on the right who really don't care or find it a political issue but they are somewhat outnumbered. For whatever reason it just is what it is. Therefore it would be extremely difficult for an Athiest to get elected in a conservative party so that sort of throws that whole segment out of the pool when considering an electable candidate. As an aside, this comes into play the other way though too because there are some people who would never, ever vote for someone heavily involved with a conservative faith even if they promised not to try to incorporate the tenets of their faith into public policy.
There is a "battle" going on in Times Square now with an Atheist organization's billboard calling Christianity a "myth."
I DO 100% support the right of religions or other groups to advertise...but isn't calling someone else's religion "make believe" insulting (whether you think that or not)?
If an Atheist group wants to promote itself that's fine, but it shouldn't use inflamatory language against another worldview.
If the word 'myth' is inflammatory, I'm thinking people getting up in arms need a slightly thicker skin.
Anyway, I find it no more inflammatory or insulting than the dozens of 'Come to Jesus before it's too late!' themed billboards advertising the Rapture last year.
Free speech and shoving our views down other people's throats FTW!!!
It's probably not as insulting as being told you are inherently evil and going to Hell. Everyone is against Atheists, man. Why should we be sympathetic and respectful to religious groups who promote the idea that we are spawns of Satan?
1. Because you are better than that?
2. Because you're taking the high road to attract people to your cause?
3. Because you recognize that the vast majority of other faith holders don't feel that way about your viewpoint and that only a teeny minority of people who think this actually exist?
I don't think this about you guys. I respectly disagree with your worldview, as you do mine, but I'm not going to plaster it on a billboard.
How can we take the moral high ground when we obviously have no moral compass?
This is like saying to a black person, "Well, just rise above racism! You're better than that!"
There are billboards all. over. this country that say things like "For the wages of sin is death!" and "There is no good without God!" and "Do you know where you're going?" with flames leaping up. There are like, four within 20 miles of my house.
I don't need to attract people to "my cause". I have no cause. And yeah, the vast majority of people of faith *do* believe that I am going to some sort of Hell, and a lot of them feel that I am basically morally bereft because I don't believe in a god.
There is a widely accepted systemic distrust of non-theists. I will not just get over it, and I will laugh when someone says that WE are too "inflammatory" with a billboard or ad campaign. We are the ones being wronged here, not people of faith.
You don't happen to live in Missouri, do you?
Cuz I saw a lot of those driving through Missouri the other week...
Why would atheists care about attracting people to their cause? Most atheists don't give a crap about what other people believe in or don't believe in. They just want to be left alone.
Then why do they post billboards insulting other religions? If this bolded part is true, then we'd be hearing a lot less from atheist groups. Most people who want to be left alone don't willingly attract attention, and controversial attention at that, to themselves. No. I disagree with you, the groups do care about what people think, they want to have a "voice" in the public square, and they are making a concerted effort with signs and law suits to be noticed. Nothing about calling belief in God a "myth" reveals a group desiring to be "left alone."
Also to the PPs who wrote about the "rapture signs, etc." Aren't lots of these signs on private lands that run parallel to major roads and highways? It's been my experience that many of these signs are of the hand-painted sort or professionally manufactured but still displayed on personal property. I've seen a lot of them in rural America.
Do you think a public display on private lands is different than taking out ad space, with hefty payments, to publically denounce other worldviews in a highly public retail space?
ML, you're the first to say that not all Christians are the same, so why are you trying to say all atheists support some random billboard that only you have seen?
I can't believe that you're really arguing that atheists are more in-your-face than a religion that spread based on conversion, missionary work, and still knocks on my door to ask if I've heard the good news.
Well... have you heard?
Worse. Texas.
No. I am talking about actual billboards, on the sides of major interstates, all the way from here through the DFW metroplex. It is the exact same thing as the billboard in Times Square. And even if it wasn't...no. It says "In God We Trust" on my money. Christians aren't allowed to be upset about other religions in America.
Heh. Yeah- I lived in El Paso for about 18 months but I feel like they're pretty tame there. Mostly you just get a lot of pro-life billboards. Definitely no rapture billboards, I didn't see those until I was in California and they were EVERYWHERE.
I'm in southwest Oklahoma now and see a lot more of the in-your-face type stuff. But Missouri definitely won.
And yeah, an atheism billboard in Times Square just means that the group was willing to pay a lot more for their advertising spot than off the side of I-44.