




Views: 114

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Negative Examples of the Campaign:
"You KNOW It's a Myth. Celebrate the Season with Reason"  - This is the most common one.
"You Know There Is No God -- We Know You're Right!"
"Jesus Affirmed a Gay Couple"

"You know they are All Scams"

Positive Examples:
"Don't believe in God?" "You are not alone."

Perhaps not 'negative' depending on how you look at it, but definitely confrontational.
Fox works because it's an insult to intelligence - not an insult to dogma.  Outlandish is fine by me, and to that end I recommend a billboard with a pink unicorn and the words "Why not?"
Heather you crack me up.

Dallas I take issue especially in the last one "You know they are all Scams".  It is an insult. But I get your perspective.


I've done a lot of work in conflict resolution and the way to get a point across is not to cause defensiveness through aggression which is what it does. 


I hate to take O'Reilly's viewpoint, but taken out of context, if I call anything you care about "a scam" it is insulting. It would give me no reason to engage your further.

Then how about a message that is engaging rather than provoking?


Aspire to Reason

Think Atheist!

Exactly Heather!!!!  Ooh that's going on a T-shirt!

Perhaps it's a type of Dunning-Kruger effect, where religious people tend to overestimate the validity of religious arguments and its proponents, and underestimate the validity of scientific arguments and its proponents. In religion, the search for knowledge is assumed to be negative and persons with knowledge should be doubted.

Many religious people refuse to accept the authority of scientists upon the meaning and origin of life, and therefore ignore the arguments. Admittedly, I am not very good at listening to and concidering the arguments of religion, because I fnd it hard to understand why anyone would doubt the massive amount of evidence to the contrary.

The most worrying thing about religioin is not it's acceptance of a higher being, it's the rejection of evidence based science.

I think the lady is right. Every approach should be taken from insult to calling on their better judgement, but when I think about all the evil that has and is being carried out at this very moment in the insane name of religion, calling a spade a spade seems appropriate.
Calling a spade a spade only states the obvious and does not change the fact that a spade is a spade.  I really hate it when politicians justify socially unacceptable stances by saying, "Well at least I'm not afraid to call a spade a spade," as though there is some sort of correlation between good judgement and lack of survival instincts.  Imagine pride in having the courage to walk up to a 300 lb professional wrestler to call him a 'dumb muscle head'.  Where is the virtue in stating the obvious? How does that possibly improve the situation?

When is the last time you heard a politician use that term as  even I hesitate, because to some people it may have racial undertones. I grew up in a place and time when it simply meant telling the truth. Why would you possibly walk up to any one and call them something unless you knew this to be a fact. What is wrong with being honest even if it does offend. You cannot base the truth on who it might rub the wrong way, because it will allways bother someone because it invovles something so personal as their belief system no-matter how absurd

I'm just saying that being right doesn't make you righteous.  There is no virtue in knowing the truth, or even in asserting it, if you can't persuade others to its realization.


Blog Posts

Creationists Dispute


Services we love!

We are in love with our Amazon

Book Store!

Gadget Nerd? Check out Giz Gad!

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com


© 2014   Created by umar.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service