For Atheists rights, or done out of spite?

[Retro Rob]

After dinner last night, I came across this article about Atheists erecting a granite bench right next to a monument erected by religious people, down in Florida.

Personally, I don't see anything wrong with them doing this -- everyone has a right to free speech, but it doesn't seem very productive if it's going to mock the one erected by Christians, nor would it be productive should this turn into a 6 year-old playground mudslinging contest between the two groups.

While I question the intent, I am not surprised about silly things like this going on in this world. I will be honest, though, it seems to me the only reason why this bench is being built is because of failed attempts to get the religious monument removed, so they're going to make their own -- despite the probability that they wouldn't have ever built a bench to start with.

Thoughts? Corrections on my assessment?

 

[shadow9d9]

What do you see as the problem?

 

[Charles Kozierok]

It does sound like it's mocking the Ten Commandments display. Something that very much needs a good mocking.

It also makes a very important constitutional point that is also worth making.

 

[Retro Rob]

What do you see as the problem?

Got anything worthy to add instead?

Charles,

I think is a combination of both -- crapping the 10 and also exercising the rights they have. Many feel the way you do, but I could easily say Atheists don't believe in anything (an opinion I don't hold of you guys, btw) but that doesn't make it true.

Seriously, things like this makes me think theists and atheists would never universally, truly get along well.

I think it's rather sad, actually.

 

[zsdersw]

It does sound like it's mocking the Ten Commandments display. Something that very much needs a good mocking.

It also makes a very important constitutional point that is also worth making.

This.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

I think is a combination of both -- crapping the 10 and also exercising the rights they have. Many feel the way you do, but I could easily say Atheists don't believe in anything (an opinion I don't hold of you guys, btw) but that doesn't make it true.

You can say whatever you like, but that doesn't mean it's true. Atheists believe in plenty of things, though of course not always the same things.

Seriously, things like this makes me think theists and atheists would never universally, truly get along well.

They'd get along fine if theists would keep their mythology in their churches where it belongs rather than rubbing everyone else's faces in it.

 

[fskimospy]

Got anything worthy to add instead?

Charles,

I think is a combination of both -- crapping the 10 and also exercising the rights they have. Many feel the way you do, but I could easily say Atheists don't believe in anything (an opinion I don't hold of you guys, btw) but that doesn't make it true.

Seriously, things like this makes me think theists and atheists would never universally, truly get along well.

I think it's rather sad, actually.

If religious people are going to use public property to promote their beliefs I hardly see it as a problem for non-religious people to use that same property to promote their beliefs.

In the United States there is a constant struggle by Christians (primarily) to use the power of government to enforce or promote their beliefs. While my preference would be no ten commandments and no bench, I don't blame people for wanting to push back.

 

[Jaskalas]

They'd get along fine if theists would keep their mythology in their churches where it belongs rather than rubbing everyone else's faces in it.

Speaking of rubbing... the 10 commandants are treated as a symbol and an honor to our Judeo-Christian heritage. People don't like it when that heritage is disparaged in any way.

Many consider it the moral basis for America, its laws, and our Bill of Rights.

 

[Moonbeam]

I know a guy who started a huge religion because he loved so much he had himself executed so others could feel forgiven for their false faith in their own sin. He didn't cause that religion to happen by building a bench. Seems to me the whole world would be Christian if all Christians practiced that kind of love. Of course, that would also go for Atheists.

 

[Moonbeam]

Speaking of rubbing... the 10 commandants are treated as a symbol and an honor to our Judeo-Christian heritage. People don't like it when that heritage is disparaged in any way.

Many consider it the moral basis for America, its laws, and our Bill of Rights.

A big moral basis for America is that you have no right not to be offended by the display of the rights of other people. Some people don't like it when heritage is displayed. People have the right not to care who they offend, Atheists as well as Christians. Religion is the home of bigots because religion has a built in assumption that what it does is not only good, but THE GOOD. And that is exactly the point you make here. But truth is not a property of numbers, as in 'many consider' nor does traditional values prove the values are real. We all know the power of conditioning, even if we can't see it in ourselves, or won't.

 

[smackababy]

Speaking of rubbing... the 10 commandants are treated as a symbol and an honor to our Judeo-Christian heritage. People don't like it when that heritage is disparaged in any way.

Many consider it the moral basis for America, its laws, and our Bill of Rights.

So. free speech is only okay if you agree with it or it isn't making fun of your precious heritage? Gotcha.


If Christians want to erect public monuments to honor their faith, they should have no problem with someone erecting a public monument to poke fun at it. Being against that is the reason people view religion as bad. You are all for rights when it comes to yourselves, but are willing to deny rights to those that don't believe.

 

[JD50]

Speaking of rubbing... the 10 commandants are treated as a symbol and an honor to our Judeo-Christian heritage. People don't like it when that heritage is disparaged in any way.

Many consider it the moral basis for America, its laws, and our Bill of Rights.

Well that's silly. How many of the 10 commandments are actually laws?

 

[Dendra]

They'd get along fine if theists would keep their mythology in their churches where it belongs rather than rubbing everyone else's faces in it.

Or in the case of benches, their rears.

If you want to pray to your god, or non-god, keep it in your own head, your own home, or your own church. Public advertising sullies the environment.

 

[Jaskalas]

If Christians want to erect public monuments to honor their faith...

We're speaking of the 10 commandants. You're telling us they're only a "monument to Christians" and I oppose that notion, as I explained above.

The law of this nation has a Judeo-Christian heritage. There's a reason they're placed at courthouses. It's not to honor anyone's faith, but our courts, our laws, and our system of government.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

They are viewed as a patriotic symbol because of who are are and where we come from.

 

[fskimospy]

We're speaking of the 10 commandants. You're telling us they're only a "monument to Christians" and I oppose that notion, as I explained above.

The law of this nation has a Judeo-Christian heritage. There's a reason they're placed at courthouses. It's not to honor anyone's faith, but our courts, our laws, and our system of government.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

They are viewed as a patriotic symbol because of who are are and where we come from.

You realize that the guy who wrote that wasn't a Christian (at least in the generally understood sense) and vehemently opposed the intersection of religion and government, right?

 

[Charles Kozierok]

This country has as much a deist and humanist heritage as "Judeo-Christian", so if the ten commandments belong in a public place, there's nothing wrong with secular monuments as well.

Of course, like the phony "war on Christmas", the real objection is not to someone else having a monument, but to the audacity of anyone suggesting Christians shouldn't get special treatment.

As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen [Muslims],—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan [Mohammedan] nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

-- Treaty of Tripoli, 1797

 

[Jaskalas]

Why do you guys insist that this is explicitly Christian in nature and context?

 

[smackababy]

Why do you guys insist that this is explicitly Christian in nature and context?

The issue isn't concerning Christians (who, in this country, make up the vocal majority of those opposing rights based on a religion). It is about all religious people wanting to silence the free speech rights of those without said beliefs because they say something that mocks their religion.

So, you can continue to argue the semantics, and we will continue to argue the issue.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Why do you guys insist that this is explicitly Christian in nature and context?

Because Christians are the only ones who insist on these religious PDAs. Jews are used to being minorities, and Judaism is not a proselytic religion. And it doesn't apply to anyone else.

(Yes, some of them reflect fairly universal moral standards. Many do not.)

 

[Atomic Playboy]

We're speaking of the 10 commandants. You're telling us they're only a "monument to Christians" and I oppose that notion, as I explained above.

The law of this nation has a Judeo-Christian heritage. There's a reason they're placed at courthouses. It's not to honor anyone's faith, but our courts, our laws, and our system of government.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

They are viewed as a patriotic symbol because of who are are and where we come from.

The Ten Commandments are a religious symbol, not a basis for the founding of our system of laws. Let's run through the list:

1. I am the Lord thy God. Thou shall have no other Gods before me. Not a law.
2. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image. Not a law.
3. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain. Not a law.
4. Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Not a law.
5. Honour thy father and thy mother. Not a law.
6. Thou shalt not kill. Law.
7. Thou shalt not commit adultery. Not a law.
8. Thou shalt not steal. Law.
9. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour. Law.
10. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, wife, servants or propery. Not a law.

If we were founded on the 10 Commandments, why are 70% of them not laws in our country? Why do we have Constitutional Amendments that specifically prohibit making the first four of them into laws? I don't understand the need for Judeo-Christian folks to latch onto the Ten Commandments as though they are some foundational document for all civilization when many of the concepts contained within are no longer relevant in today's society. The first four are religion-specific, and while the others are generally good advice for living a moral life, coveting is basically the driving factor behind capitalism, so it doesn't really work for us either.

I'm a fan of George Carlin's take on the Ten Commandments. We don't need ten. Just three. Thou shalt always be honest and faithful, thou shalt not kill, and thou shalt keep thy religion to thyself.

 

[crashtestdummy]

To me, this bench strikes me as the Atheist equivalent of a Gay Pride Parade. There are an enormous numbers of conspicuous monuments to religion, including houses of worship themselves, but very few markers available to the world that there are those who don't believe in God.

As an atheist who is part of a religious community, it's very easy to be "closeted" as an atheist. The result is that many people--especially those who are religious, often don't know that they know atheists, and thus treat them as an abstract threat, as gay people were viewed for so long.

That said, I'm a little bothered by the antireligious sentiment that's going into the bench. Not that I view it as legally wrong, but more that I would rather have a bench that is for atheists than against a specific organized religion. I just seems petty.

(Disclaimer: I'm not saying atheists have it anywhere near as rough as gay people had it 30 years ago. They just happen to have this particular trait in common.)

 

[bradly1101]

There are lots of believers who aren't included in Christianity too, not just atheists.

I am without religion and I don't believe in a God. I believe everything can be explained by science and luck.

I am considered an atheist by Christians.

I have strong convictions though. The Buddha was just a dude. He had no magic powers, which is why I don't think of Buddhism as a religion as such. There is no blind faith in miracles, just some thoughtful reflection on some powerful words, lots of finding solace in the serenity of a still mind, and lots of acceptance and love toward the universe.

Are we talking about a bench? Isn't a 2nd bench always a good idea? There's more room to sit!

Where's the Buddha bench? Where's the Muslim bench?

 

[Fern]

For Atheists rights, or done out of spite?

Spite.

The atheists should do a monument that reflects something positive about themselves or their thinking/beliefs. Not something that is merely intended to slight some other group. It leaves the impression that all they stand for is slighting others, which not exactly positive or desirable.

I think there are plenty of quotes etc extolling the virtues of science or rational thought that they could use.

Fern

 

[smackababy]

Buddhists would be content sitting on any bench, because they respect other people's religions. Muslims probably blew theirs up. (I kid, I kid).

Buddhism is not a traditional religion, but more about self reflection and spirituality following the Buddha's example.

 

[SMOGZINN]

It does sound like it's mocking the Ten Commandments display. Something that very much needs a good mocking.

It also makes a very important constitutional point that is also worth making.

I don't think it is so much mocking the display as making the counter argument for the one The Commandments display is making. The whole point is that the Commandments display is supposed to tell people that the court is a Christian court, as we have seen argued in this thread, the bench is a counter argument to that that hopefully balances out what the Commandment display is trying to say.

Are we talking about a bench? Isn't a 2nd bench always a good idea? There's more room to sit!

Where's the Buddha bench? Where's the Muslim bench?

The Muslim and Buddhist community needs to make their own displays and put it there. That is part of the agreement, you can't have one religion with out allowing the others. I personally think it would be great if all the minority religions created their own display to be added. Maybe we could add a Buddhist water fountain, a 2000lb wrote iron Hindu bike rack, the Jews can have a 3 ton marble Star of David, a bas-relief green man for the pagans...