Christian steals atheists' sign.

[Father Heathen]

Chuck Norris doesn't believe in evolution and hates gays. I dismiss him offhandedly.

He's a washed up B actor who should just stick to his late night Bow Flex infomercials.

 

[Apex]

I think there should be a national campaign to have "No God Exists" next to every religious (public) display in the country.

I think this statement qualifies you for the same treatment you give Chuck Norris, and for nearly identical reasons.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I think there should be a national campaign to have "No God Exists" next to every religious (public) display in the country.

I understand the impetus for this, but I wish it could be accomplished with a little more fun. I'm tired of the atheists and secularists being portrayed in the media as the humourless sticks-in-the-mud. Wouldn't it be better to have some sort of display that's actually funny?

While I believe that your message and the one on the FFRF's web site are technically true, they're not exactly tactful or witty; I don't think either one really does anything other than be a "poison pill" to get rid of public religious displays, but you can do that with plenty of other approaches, too.

Wouldn't it be great to have, say, an animatronic nativity scene where the baby Jesus in the manger has been replaced with a baby Mithras killing the bull while Joseph, Mary and the Magi look on and cheer? You could even add a light-up banner across the top of the display saying "Go Mithras! It's your birthday!"

Kids would think that it was a lot more awesome than the boring old nativity scene next to it, and the Christian parents would get to be the party poopers when they drag their kids away from it and refuse to answer their awkward questions that point toward a derivative nature of Christianity. That would still be just as good a "poison pill" to the lawmakers, but we could entertain some kids in the process and someone else would end up being cast as the killjoys.

Heck, I think that even a statue of the Flying Spaghetti Monster wearing a Santa hat would be better than the standard approach so far. The way a lot of these groups approach this issue, you'd think that non-theists don't have a sense of humour at all.

 

[Apex]

Do you guys enjoy ridiculing other people's sacred beliefs for no other reason than your own sadistic pleasures?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Do you guys enjoy ridiculing other people's sacred beliefs for no other reason than your own sadistic pleasures?

No, I enjoy ridiculing other people's need to have taxpayer subsidy and government support for their promotion of religion.

IMO:

Nativity scene on a church lawn: perfectly fine.
Nativity scene in the middle of a privately-owned mall: perfectly fine.
Nativity scene in a courthouse: big problem.

Big cross set up on private property, visible from the road: perfectly fine.
Big cross set up in the road allowance: big problem.

For me, it's not about expression of religion. It's about using government as a vehicle for that expression.

 

[Father Heathen]

Do you guys enjoy ridiculing other people's sacred beliefs for no other reason than your own sadistic pleasures?

It's my fetish. I wear a leather mask when I post.

 

[Copernicus]

While I believe that your message and the one on the FFRF's web site are technically true, they're not exactly tactful or witty; I don't think either one really does anything other than be a "poison pill" to get rid of public religious displays, but you can do that with plenty of other approaches, too.

I think that you capture the FFRF tactic rather neatly. It was intended as a poison pill for the state government's "liberal" policy of allowing religious camel noses under the tent. I agree that it could have been done in a less heavy-handed fashion.