Atheist Accuses Jews of ‘Religious Bigotry’ After Landlord Refuses to Display ‘Myth’ Billboard
- Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:01pm by
Billy Hallowell
- Print »
- Email »
American Atheists' David Silverman (Image Credit: FOX News)
As The Blaze reported last week, members of the organization American Atheists are taking their quest to target non-believers to new heights.
Billboards written in Hebrew and Arabic are popping up in an effort to find and empower non-believing Muslims and Jews. But as this effort rolls out, it seems one Brooklyn, New York, neighborhood is fighting against the atheist groups’ messaging.
The billboard, which reads, “You know it’s a myth…and you have a choice,” was prevented from appearing in the Orthodox Jewish community at the last minute when the landlord at the site — Kenny Stier — refused to display it. Stier was quoted as saying that he didn’t want to get involved in the religious debate between atheists and Jews after he made his decision not to allow the sign.
MSNBC has more about the billboard’s purpose:
It is an advertisement for the upcoming “Reason Rally” in Washington, D.C., billed as the biggest atheist gathering in U.S. history, and for the American Atheists’ convention immediately afterward.
It was also intended to urge non-believers to overcome their fears and “come out” in their heavily religious communities.
Image Credit: American Atheists
American Atheists President Dave Silverman is extremely frustrated with the decision to prevent his organization from displaying the billboard and has stated his belief that rabbis pressured Stier not to allow the sign. In an interview with the Christian Post, Silverman said that the action is rooted in “religious bigotry.”
“He looked at the vinyl and refused to allow the billboard company to post it. Then he went into ‘no comment’ mode,” Silverman said, referring to Stier. ”It disappoints me that a group which has been the victim of religious bigotry over the millennia has now become the purveyor of such bigotry.”
After invoking the claim that the Jewish population in the Brooklyn neighborhood is discriminating against atheists, Silverman continued.
“Atheists have every right to advertise as we see fit, just like everyone else,” he said. ”I wonder how the Jews would react if they were told where they could advertise and what they could say, because some people might be ‘offended’ at their position.”
Locals, though, disagree.
“I think it’s their right,” Rabbi Steven Burg explained. Burg, the managing director of the Orthodox Union, a Jewish organization, went on to say, ”I think it’s your right to say that something is too offensive to the general community….I don’t have a problem at all with that decision.”
Burg dismissed Silverman‘s claims of bigotry and said that the atheist group shouldn’t be surprised by the reaction it has received in such a religious community.
Silverman’s group has already selected a new location along the Brooklyn-Queens expressway and is slated to have the sign up today.
(H/T: Christian Post)
Popular Stories
MSNBC Host Snaps in Heated Segment: ‘What in the World Is Riskier Than Being a Poor Person in America?’ 687 Comments
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 657 Comments
‘Jumah at the DNC’ Speaker: ‘Muslims Visited America Prior to Columbus’ & ‘It Was a Muslim’ Who Guided Him to the ‘New World’ 524 Comments
Obama: RNC Like Watching ‘Black-and-White TV’ Because Romney ‘Did Not Offer a Single New Idea’ 361 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 321 Comments
Faith
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 197 Comments- Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More
- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 218 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
In Case You Haven’t Heard, President Obama Issued a Major Executive Order Last Week Read More- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 147 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 300 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 197 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (139)
TheChurch
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 1:26pmIf you say something about gays you are given a label of hater, small minded, lacking tolerance, and the list goes on. Special laws are passed to protect gays from “hate speech” and name calling. Athiest on the other hand say there is no God; religion causes all wars since the beginning of time; religious people are stupid; and countless other unproven facts and it is acceptable, even by some in the gay community. Shouldn’t religion be given the same rights as the gay community and others demand? If so then Athiest are guilty of hate speech toward those who are religious. In order to end “hate speech” nothing bad can be said about anyone at any time.
Report Post »Kitkarr
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 1:25pmIsn’t saying that “I don’t believe in anything and those who do are less intelligent than me because my view point is the only right one and I will not tolerate anyone who believes in anything at all!” in and of its self the very definition of bigotry? Especially when you add, “I will go to great lengths to show how stupid it is to believe in something that I don’t by putting up billboards across the country and by physically attacking those who openly share thier beliefs as I do, but thier’s is wronger than mine. Cause I’m right all of the time.”
I don’t know, maybe that’s not what they are trying to say.
Report Post »Obama Snake Oil Co
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 1:44pmHere is my sign; Aethists have a special place in hell! Aethists, if you gonna go to hell anyway, try to bring others with you, we will all party down there or how about Aethists, going to hell, like, almost forever.
Report Post »HumbleMan
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 1:52pmHey you … “rapes babies” is way over the line. You say you don’t believe in God. Can you prove you’re right? If not, it’s a “belief system” which is “faith based”.
Report Post »an.atheist
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 1:58pmBurden of proof is on the people who claim something. I say there is a purple unicorn that rains down magical rainbows on me, but only I can see him. Prove he doesn’t exist please.
Report Post »SquidVetOhio
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 2:00pmI’ve reported this godless heathen to the blaze. God help him. His knowledge of christianity is laughable at best. I‘m sure this punk wouldn’t walk around in public wearing a t-shirt that has his user name on it.
COFemale
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 2:13pmAnd you kill babies daily here in the US when you support pro-choice. So what is your point you dip _____? I know you picked your name just to “offend” Christians on this site, so that speaks volumes on you and your character. Satan must be so proud of you, not to mention your mother.
Before you point out the splinter in someone else eyes, perhaps you might want to remove the log out of yours.
Report Post »HumbleMan
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 2:16pmDon’t make me laugh. Can you prove that God doesn’t exist? Can you prove you are correct in your assertion that God does not exist?
Why must you be so “offensive” with your hate of Christians. I suppose you do not believe in the 1st amendment right to freedom of religion?
Report Post »an.atheist
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 2:28pmNo, you can‘t prove God doesn’t exist, which is the point I was making. You can‘t prove anything that is supernatural doesn’t exist, because it’s not in our grasp to do so, just like my little purple unicorn buddy.
There is no point in trying to disprove what doesn’t exist. I’d rather spend time trying to understand what does exist, on this Earth.
Report Post »smithclar3nc3
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 3:04pmThe should put up billboards that say
Report Post »You don’t believe in God
Well Satan believes in you
Leopold
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 3:58pm@ an.atheist
Your picture is repulsive and disgusting. I asume that is the purpose of it. It shows who and what you are really all about.
You can ask us for proof of God when you come up with proof of evolution. Proof, not just bable.
The Bible is a threat to you. It points out that your are a sinner. It judges you and your behavior and that is what you cannot handle. You want to sin with no consequences to you. Getting rid of the Bible is not going to change that. Your problem is on the inside. It’s called a conscience. Nothing, you do on the outside will change that.
Oh, and going after Muslims is nothing but cover.
I think Atheists are very afraid of God. Often people hate that which they are in fear of. And try all kinds of shenanigans to get rid of that fear. They will never admit that this is the case, if they are even aware of it.
Report Post »Leopold
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:02pm@ an.atheist
They cannot handle looking at a religious symbol or writing on the wall that speaks about God. I wonder if they experience physical symptoms. Like a tightening of the chest They believe that they are strong, but their behaviour says otherwise. They seem to get mentally ill, like depression from fear of exclusion, that is why they sue everybody. I’m not sure if they also get very bad headaches or tummy aches. Maybe even the chills. We should have pity on them. Jesus did, He even said: “Father forgive them for they know not what they are doing.”
I wish they would not be so obnoxious and hateful though. Their crutch is science and that becomes their authority. Unfortunately, with that they stop thinking and become very ignorant and narrow-minded. I have to ask Jesus to help me love these people. He told us to love our enemies.
In their arrogance atheists don’t even realize that they are fools. And so they become rather useful tools for satan. How very unfortunate.
PS.
Now it may proof itself (evolution) to be true, after all. However, we have to wait a while. You see, now with bestiality becoming more fashionable we may actually evolve back to monkeys.
Report Post »portague
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:46pm“Burden of proof is on the people who claim something” you do realize that goes both ways right if you claim it does not exist prove it does not exist. So the argument goes the other way as well as much as one can not bring hard evidence god does exist the same can be said for those that say he does not exist.
Report Post »Kitkarr
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 5:04pmI don‘t know who’s talking about raping babies and I hope Squid doesn‘t think I’m a Godless heathen, but the whole point of Christianity is being missed here. A mortal man cannot prove God exists. However, The Holy Spirit sure as heck can. Its not even our job as Christians to try and prove that God exists. Those who do not believe are condemned already because the evidence of a Creator is in the creation and that is the reason they are without excuse.
The picture is offensive, but a saved person won’t lose his/her salvation over it. Let’s remember Who its offensive toward anyway. Not us. He will not be mocked and this will end with either someone’s enlightenment and change of heart, or with someone’s total and eternal destruction. It is not our call to decide which, nor should it be. We are called to be a witness and if that witness is rejected, we shake it off and move on.
Let them have thier pictures and thier comments and pray for them just as you would yourself. God will handle it His way.
As a sidebar, macro-evolution is easily disproved by a number of other scientific theories, as well as certain elements of its own. Darwin himself stated several times that it was merely a theory. No one in either Testament ever made that claim about God.
Report Post »Bad_Ashe
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 5:51pm@AN.ATHEIST
The only thing more absurd than your antagonistic little icon is your logic. This is simply the atheist dodge at work again.
Philosophically speaking, the burden is on anyone who makes an assertion or claim. While it may be difficult to scientifically “prove” a negative, this does not help the atheist get out of supporting their argument when it comes to philosophical and metaphysical assertions, though they always attempt to lean on this exceedingly wobbly crutch as it makes for a conventient excuse when making unsubstantiated claims.
If an atheist states “There is no evidence for God’s existence” that is still an assertion that needs to be philosophically supported, the same as if the atheist states “There is no God”. Conversely, if the atheist states “I don’t believe that there is a God” then the support is not needed as they are simply giving a personal opinion that only reflects on them as opposed to a universal epistemological claim.
Why is it that antagonistic Internet atheists such as yourself continue to appeal to logic and philosophical reasoning when they are so dreadfully bad at it?
Report Post »Bad_Ashe
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 6:03pmThis is the nth time we’ve seen this same pattern from the militant godless. Let’s break it down, shall we?
- Socially autistic Atheist or Atheist organization creates something intentionally antagonistic that (despite their claims to the contrary) targets religious believers, a group makes up the majority of the U.S. and around the globe.
- Community rejects Atheist antagonism, which is more often than not well within their rights to do.
- Atheists feign hurt and wounded, as if they are just innocent lambs to the slaughter, screaming all the way about the evils of religion and big bad sky-daddy. While some atheists think that this controversy is good for their cause, all it really accomplishes is to make people tired of dealing with them.
Based on this pattern, I’ve a novel idea for any of you budding atheist evangelists out there. Figure out a way to express your beliefs without being antagonistic little Delta Bravos.
Cheers!
Report Post »JohnnyMidknight
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 6:15pmI think American Atheists President Dave Silverman should approach Aljazeera regarding placing an ad on TV… I would love to hear about bigotry then… In fact, he should personally go to Iran and have a meeting with the government about it.
They behead you for blasphemy.
At least her in America, we have a right to be bigots. He should count himself lucky to be here we he can express his beliefs. He just can‘t place a sign on private property without the owner’s permission. But that is because of the freedom of private property. Got to love freedom I say.
Report Post »kfrederic
Posted on March 9, 2012 at 3:17pmI think it‘s fair to assume what they said was exactly what they’re trying to say. I just wonder why anyone pays them any attention: They claim to know the unknowable. Believe or don’t believe, but confusing belief and knowledge is mental illness.
Report Post »walkandtalk
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 1:23pmThis is really an angry person yelling because he could not force a private property owner to display his sign. The signs displayed were one in Hebrew and one in Arabic. Hebrew and Arabic are considered holy by two faiths. One could say this was an attack on the two religious faiths. So the argument could be made that this man is touting religious bigotry by the nature of the languages on the signs since most Americans who speak or read Hebrew or Arabic speak and read English.
Report Post »MidWestMom
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 2:28pmThis has nothing to do with one religion or another or atheism. It is about a private property owner having the right to refuse to allow anything displayed on his property. Atheists are trying to cloak it in a religious bigotry argument in order to hide the fact they are saying the property owner does not have the right to deny them.
Report Post »walkandtalk
Posted on March 9, 2012 at 1:26ammidwestmom you did not understand my post. I am saying this is two things. 1st. The atheist man was angry because he wanted to put his sign on private property and the propery owner would not allow it which is the property owners right. The second point is the atheist’s signs were written in two different languages. In the case of the one in Hebrew it was the goal of the atheist to place it on property in a predominately Orthodox Jewish neighborhood. In an orthodox community the scriptures are written and read in Hebrew. So this was religious bigotry toward an Orthodox community. In the case of the Arabic sign the same would hold true for the Koran in a predominately Islamic community. There was no need for either sign to be in a language other than English if the atheist’s intent was to make a statement. Writing it in either Hebrew or Arabic is bigotry because both are considered sacred languages in the communities to which the signs were directed.The English translation in effect was saying your religious belief is a myth and so is the holy writings. I hope this explains that this wasn’t just an argument about property rights this was an attack on two different faiths. A non-believer does not need a sign. They know what they believe and what they don’t. This is directed at those who do believe.
Report Post »walkandtalk
Posted on March 9, 2012 at 1:38amThe atheist accused the Jewish community of bigotry when in fact he was being bigoted by the nature of the signs and the communities being targeted.
Report Post »ThankBabyJesus
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 1:17pmStop pushing ur worship of knowledge on meh atheists! dang nabbit :S
Report Post »SacredHonor1776
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 1:16pmNon-believing Muslim? Isn’t that an oxymoron.
…or is it a reference to one whose father is a Muslim, is also a Muslim, even if they don’t like it. If they deny it, thry are an apostate?!
Report Post »Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 1:06pm“… he didn’t want to get involved in the religious debate between atheists and Jews after he made his decision not to allow the sign.”
By accepting just another advertizer’s contract, he was not getting into the debate, but by folding to pressure, he DID insinuate himself into the debate.
Report Post »COFemale
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 2:18pmWhere do you get this pressure idea? I read nowhere that the owner of the billboard was pressured. Is this another one of those bogus beliefs atheist have. It is called freedom of choice. Perhaps that is a concept that escapes that pea brain of yours.
Report Post »DexterMorgan
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 2:51pmWas wondering when **** Packing Double A’s was going to appear with some tidbit to try and prove how unethical believers are.
Report Post »Bad_Ashe
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 6:12pmYet he’s still well within his rights as a private property owner. Careful now everyone, or LBHP will attempt to camouflage her overwhelming bias and philosophical and historical ignorance with a cornucopia of legal jargon.
Report Post »Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
Posted on March 9, 2012 at 1:39am@ Cefemale:
Uhhhh… How are your eyes? They good? You’re not in need of glasses, are you? How’re your reading for comprehension skills?
“American Atheists President Dave Silverman is extremely frustrated with the decision to prevent his organization from displaying the billboard and has stated his belief that rabbis pressured Stier not to allow the sign.”
Silverman was the one dealing directly with Stier. He knows best what the man’s demeanor was after the contract to rent the billboard was set and what it was just before the vinyl was to be applied.
Report Post »paperpushermj
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 1:05pm“Atheists have every right to advertise as we see fit, just like everyone else,” he said. ”I wonder how the Jews would react if they were told where they could advertise and what they could say, because some people might be ‘offended’ at their position.”
Report Post ».
THAT‘S WAY JEWS DON’T PROSELYTIZE
paperpushermj
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 1:00pmAmerican Atheists President Dave Silverman is extremely frustrated with the decision to prevent his organization from displaying the billboard and has stated his belief that rabbis pressured Stier not to allow the sign.
Report Post ».
GET USED TO IT
Kitkarr
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:57pmWhy do atheists feel the need to advertise anyway? Are they pushing a product? If they were really as passive about the whole thing as most of them claim to be, they wouldn’t care if someone else believed or not. How does it affect them, right?
I’m Christian, I’m not trying to advocate putting up billboards that say something like, “The Flying Spaghetti Monster is racist! He only loves Italians!” Because the flying spaghetti monster is not real, I don’t believe in him. So, I don’t speak out about him. It would be a waste of my time to do so.
Seems like all outspoken atheists do is waste thier own time.
Report Post »Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 1:10pmBe careful. You do realize that plenty of Christian organizations advertize to raise their attendance levels. By besmirching the idea that Atheists do the same, you are catching those church ads in your back scatter.
And they’re not just advertizing that religion is a myth. They are also advertizing themselves as an organization, their website… not sure how that was an ad for the upcoming Atheist Jamborees, though. Hafta look into that one.
Report Post »Kitkarr
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 1:17pmLesbian – Not sure I agree with churches advertising, either. Depends on how its done, I guess. Christ isn’t a product.
Btw, cool picture.
Report Post »SacredHonor1776
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 1:46pmKitkarr, I’ve seen churches with their anti-abortion billboards, and use of bible verses. Christ is the way type generic messages. John 3:16, etc.
You do realize thr left loathe those, right?
Report Post »Kitkarr
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:49pmSacred – Sure, I’ve seen them too. I’m familiar with The Great Commission and what Christians are called to do. What I was saying is that I think putting up a billboard and thinking that you’re fullfilling that call is kind of an easy way out of actually doing something productive. Like feeding the hungry or clothing the poor.
I’m a little umcomfortable with any of this type of stuff being “advertised” like its candy or vodka. I don’t mind seeing John 3:16 or a pro-adoption billboard, but I don’t think that should be a cop out. Also, pictures of Jesus aren’t cool, especially when they’re tied to a $6,000,000 mega-church ad campaign. And I certainly don’t want to see any slanderous signs equating Christianity to slavery or bigotry.
Report Post »SacredHonor1776
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 5:20pmKitkarr, I don’t necessarily disagree with all your points…
Those billboards from last year ‘predicting the end of the world’ and asking people to give up all their money from Harold Camping, we’re rediculous.
I also have no interest in calling the number on the signs offering a ‘free’ Book of Morman, or to buy a copy of ‘Dianetics’. But eh they have a right to advertise their products… If all involved agreed to the contract…
I have respect for the Gideon’s or similar organizations that include free copies of their books/tracts in semi-public places (hospitals, hotel rooms, etc.) I‘m surprised that Athiests haven’t come up with a similar system to include books/tracts in similar manner if the private owners allow.
Report Post »Bad_Ashe
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 6:23pmAs with churches, if Atheists want to advertise it is well within their rights to do so. All it typically accomplishes is to show them for the logically-challenged antagonistic (my word of the day, apparently) little social autistics that they are. At most these advertisements preach to the converted and simply serve to irritate the majority of the community in which the advertisement appears.
Despite atheist claims to the contrary, this isn’t really about godless outreach, it’s about religious antagonism (ding), and if you read the various comments from these atheist organizations, most of them eventually let that cat out of the bag.
Idiots have a right to spout their idiocy, and that‘s a good thing as it’s the only way that everyone can see them for what they really are.
Report Post »aChameleon
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:54pmNo Shirt
Report Post »No Shoes
No God
No Service
~We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone~
an.atheist
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 1:27pmAnd then when you find an Atheist who refuses you, you’ll be up in arms.
Report Post »aChameleon
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 1:45pmI wouldn’t knowingly give a single cent to an atheist for anything.
Report Post »an.atheist
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 1:55pmKnow the computer you are using, ya well, an atheist made the operating system that allows you to use it.
Report Post »SquidVetOhio
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 2:05pmA christian founded the laws of physics that allow the electrons to power it. Not to mention the christian that found the law of gravity that’s holding it to your desk….. Genius
Report Post »aChameleon
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 2:06pmAl Gore?
Report Post »Bad_Ashe
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 6:35pm@AN.ATHEIST
I’m pretty sure Steve Jobs was a Buddhist. Badump-Bump! Two shows a night everybody — two shows a night!
In all seriousness though, this really is the dumbest sort of trolling — unless of course you want to go through the societal contribution of every religious person on Earth, which far outnumbers atheist contributions by way of simple demographics alone.
I noticed that you created your account two days ago simply so that you could post drivel on religious topics. This coincides with the observation that quite a few of you popped up the other day in the Dawkins/Anon story. Did you all flock over here from DickieDwakins.net because someone was posting a story about your godless paper tiger hero? Did you flock from Pharynghoula perhaps?
Get out of your parent’s basement for entity-you-don’t-believe-in’s sake — go meet a nice guy or girl — take a spinning class — something.
Report Post »Gonzo
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:50pmLiberals have no concept of private property.
Report Post »Steelhead
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:55pmhairy – do you see any liberals giving up their private property? nice one
Report Post »MidWestMom
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 1:01pmI’m betting that atheists would say it was their right to not allow a pro-religion sign on their private property. And they would scream if someone accused them of bigotry.
Report Post »Gonzo
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 1:02pmNo, but I see liberals galore trying to tell private property owners what they should do with their property.
Report Post »Smokey_Bojangles
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:44pmLandlords OWN the property. He can refuse anything he wants.
Report Post »qzak491
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:43pm.
DID ATHEISTS ACTUALLY ADMIT WHAT THEY BELIEVE IS A RELIGION???
This means the FFRF has to go after them now and if they don’t the FFRF is racist.
Report Post »TOMSERVO
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 2:07pmYES ALL ATHEISTS JUST SAID IN UNISON THAT ATHEISM IS A RELIGION ALL CAPS ALL CAPS BLAH
chill dude
Report Post »R4M0N
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:43pmIt‘s the guy’s private property. Like it or not, no one can force him to display a billboard he doesn’t want to display. We can discuss the reasons for him not wanting to do it all day, but in the end, it’s his choice.
Unless his decision came about through illegal/criminal means (was he threatened with physical harm by anyone?), this is his right.
Report Post »SpankDaMonkey
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:36pm.
Democrats you got to give it to them. They never stop…..
I think you’d have a better chance finding a Good Muslim, than a Good Democrat……
Report Post »Smokey_Bojangles
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:48pmMaybe we should be allowed to put a “Jesus Saves” or “Allahu Akbar” sign on Atheist Property?
Report Post »JEANNIEMAC
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:35pmThe landlord is exercising his freedom of religion under the 1st amendment. Atheists do not have a religion, so how can there be bigotry against them? It is apparent that there is an “organized” movement against religion, especially Christianity and Judaism. This is the agenda of the Obama administration.
Report Post »MidWestMom
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:54pm@jenniemac
Report Post »I understand your comment but actually the landlord is exercising his right to choose what is displayed on his private property.
dsind
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:32pmreligious bigots calling a religion bigoted?
Report Post »83plus
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:27pmAnd them wanting the removal of prayer in schools and other representations of religion on public/government property or in public/government buildings (short of churches, synagogues etc.) isn’t?
Report Post »REPUB1
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:26pm“religious debate between {atheists}and Jews” what religion exactly is and atheist anyway ??????????
Report Post »aChameleon
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:35pmWorshipping Baal ot they are muslims pretending to be atheists.
Report Post »aChameleon
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:25pmHow come the atheists don’t ever attack the muslims? It’s always the Christians and Jews that they go after. By any means necessary? Are the atheists actually muslim extremists? Coincedence?
Report Post »83plus
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:40pmThat’s a good question, I’ve noticed that myself.
Another two I don‘t seem to hear much about with these ’complaints’ is the Catholic and Mormon religions, now maybe there have been and I just haven‘t seen any news articles about it I don’t know.
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:41pmThey do “attack” Muslims, you just don’t seem to read any of the news stories about it.
The Blaze has had 2 or 3 stories within the last week or so about Atheists mocking Islam.
Open your eyes and stop playing the victim card.
Report Post »Therightsofbilly
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:54pm@LACKOFMODERATION
That might not have been the best choice of words you used there.
Maybe?
Report Post »Bad_Ashe
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 6:48pm@MOD
C’mon, really. I’m going to have to call you out on this one. Based simply on observation alone, does the amount of vitriol spewed by Atheists toward Islam even come close to matching the level hurled at Christians?
While I disagree that atheists “never” call out Islam, it is much less ubiquitous an act than the constant atheist attacks on Christianity. The reasons for this are three-fold; America (and at one time Great Britain) is culturally a predominantly Christian country, therefore atheists are naturally targeting the predominant religious culture, Muslims right now are being considered a “protected class” among the liberal left and most Atheists tend to be liberal lemmings, and last but not least, whether like to admit it or not, insulting Muslims comes with a much greater chance of having your head chopped off by Islamic extremists.
Either way, the basic truth is that Islam is not attacked by the Atheistic powers that be nearly as much as Christianity is.
Cheers!
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 7:34pm@BAD_ASHE
As you have said yourself, Christianity is very big in our society, so it wouldn’t be unusual for Atheists in America to “attack” the religion they’re exposed to the most.
It just goes back to human nature to feel “attacked” and the “victim.”
I‘m sure Muslims feels like they’re the most persecuted religion in the US
Same with the Mormons(and the attacks against them are usually from other Christians)
I went to a Jewish facility with a friend of mine and I had to sign my name and have a name tag because I had never attended that facility before(my friend informed me that they are afraid of attacks on their facility, thus the heightened security).
I was also responding to the OPs statement of, “How come the atheists don’t ever attack the muslims? It’s always the Christians and Jews that they go after”
“Ever attack? ” Always the Christians?”
Again, we both agree that Christians are mocked more by Atheists in America, I don’t deny that. They do “attack” Muslims, but on a lesser scale because they’re exposed to Islam less.
I was merely pointing out the hypocrisy of Christians who feel like “OH, CHRISTIANITY IS THE LAST RELIGION LEFT TO MOCK, YOU NEVER SEE THEM DO THIS TO ISLAM” etc, etc, etc, etc
It’s human nature to feel persecuted, isolated, etc.
Report Post »copatriots
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 8:08pmHey BAD,
Can I get your input here? As a debater, MOD does bring up effective arguments. Obviously my skills lies elsewhere. :-) And I’m not as skilled of a debater as MOD is. My soul knows the Truth, I’m just not able to express it here and I would benefit from your input. Thanks in advance!
“You still refuse to answer my question about how our founders can talk about life, liberty, freedom, pursuit of happiness…….WHILE owning other human beings?
It is illogical and nonsensical to talk about freedom while owning someone else.”
Here’s the link if you want to see the context.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/pa-atheists-use-race-slave-imagery-in-billboard-against-the-barbaric-christian-bible/
Report Post »Bad_Ashe
Posted on March 9, 2012 at 2:20am@COPATRIOTS – This was meant to be a quick post, but it didn’t turn out that way.
While I don‘t necessarily want to get into anyone else’s debate here, I was asked, so I will. This is based on a quick view of the exchange, so if I missed something, let me know. Mod’s question is a fair one on the face of it, but not as strong as it may seem when you dig into historical realities.
There seems to be two arguments going on here. Biblical endorsement of slavery, which is what inspired the original article, and the ostensible hypocrisy of the Founding Fathers. These are both oft-used atheist talking points, and they both have a hard time passing serious muster when put into historical context.
As for the first argument, slavery as described in the Old Testament was not antebellum slavery a la the American South. Hebrew-servitude was established as a way to pay off debt, kind of like indentured servitude. These were often voluntary agreements. But even considering debt and agreed servitude, the OT gives us this: Masters were to grant their servants release every seventh year with all debts forgiven (Leviticus 25:35–43)
In addition, Ancient Near East law codes had no description of slaves, only servants. These laws were actually designed to prevent lifelong servitude and the mistreatment of servants, which included anti-harm laws. So while indentured servitude seems absurd in today’s society, servants were treated as dignified human beings, not property.
Report Post »Bad_Ashe
Posted on March 9, 2012 at 2:26am@COPATRIOTS (2)
There is a plethora of historical information and OT scholarship out there on this, but once again atheists often deliver their talking points with little historical context, so they neglect to do their due diligence, simply and erroneously stating that the Bible condones slavery.
The New Testament has little to say on slavery, but what is there shows that it wasn’t looked upon too kindly by early Christians. Christian masters called Christian slaves brother or sister, and in Colossians Paul reminds masters that they are not to mistreat their slaves and that they all ultimately serve the same master (God).
So there are subtle condemnations of slavery in the NT, such as speaking against slave trading and talking about the equal personhood of slaves…but remember that the early apostles were trying to spread the message of Jesus, and calling for an end to what was looked upon as a key component of the dominant social order in Rome would not have done their cause much good. They took the long view, knowing that salvation would eventually be at hand, per their beliefs.
So for the first argument, Mod needs to take a look at historical context before he (or whomever else started this line of discussion) makes such a overarching claim.
Report Post »Bad_Ashe
Posted on March 9, 2012 at 2:32am@COPATRIOTS (3)
As far as the second claim is concerned, we can all admit that men are flawed and are often hypocrites, however this was not necessarily the case for most of the Founding Fathers. They were attempting to create a unified free republic and speaking out against the slave owners in the Southern Colonies would do nothing to help their cause. Slavery was an integral part of the societal fabric and arrived in America roughly a couple hundred years before the Founding Fathers made their mark. In this they found themselves in a situation not unlike early Christians.
Additionally, the Constitution itself put them in a bind. At this time the prevailing European cultural view on slaves was that they were property, and the Constitution is very clear regarding property rights. However, this does not mean that slavery was not an oft-discussed and long-term issue for the founders. Franklin and Jefferson both admitted that abolition was part of the motivation for declaring independence, and we all know that Washington had serious issues with slavery as well. While there admittedly was some resistance by a few of the Founding Fathers on the issue of slavery, the majority of them more or less realized that it was ultimately something that had to be addressed.
Report Post »Bad_Ashe
Posted on March 9, 2012 at 2:42am@COPATRIOTS (4)
John Quincy Adams addressed and defanged this apparent contradiction best by stating:
“The inconsistency of the institution of domestic slavery with the principles of the Declaration of Independence was seen and lamented by all the southern patriots of the Revolution; by no one with deeper and more unalterable conviction than by the author of the Declaration himself. No charge of insincerity or hypocrisy can be fairly laid to their charge. Never from their lips was heard one syllable of attempt to justify the institution of slavery. They universally considered it as a reproach fastened upon them by the unnatural step-mother country and they saw that before the principles of the Declaration of Independence, slavery, in common with every other mode of oppression, was destined sooner or later to be banished from the earth.”
So In conclusion, the Founding Fathers took the long view on slavery and planted within the Constitution the seeds of abolition, an act that eventually came to pass. Given all of this, the hypocrisy argument is fairly weak when viewed historically.
As a quick side note, let us also not forget that it was 19th century Christian Britain was the first culture to have not only rejected slavery but forcibly attack it in others as well. Christian America soon followed suit.
So yeah…that’s the kind of long-winded response you get when you invite me into a topic. That‘ll teach ya’.
Report Post »Bad_Ashe
Posted on March 9, 2012 at 2:48am@MOD
While you an I obviously find some agreement here, be careful not to misrepresent my words. That Christianity is the prevailing culture was only ONE of the reasons I mentioned. The other two are not at all very flattering for the Atheist, considering they infer cowardice and selective outrage.
Given the sheer overwhelming amount of vitriol spewed at Christians when compared to Muslims, and given the difference in how the establishment media an pop culture treats each religion, it may not be entirely accurate to say that Christianity is the last religion anyone is allowed to persecute, but it certainly can feel that way. It has less to do with playing the victim (which Atheists are experts at by the way) and more to do with simple overwhelming exposure to this double-standard.
Cheers!
Report Post »copatriots
Posted on March 9, 2012 at 9:26am@ BAD,
Thank you greatly! You did teach me. :-) Actually, you put proper words to what I knew to be Truth. I skated around the topics but you effectively communicated my utterances. Again, many thanks!
Report Post »Lurchbus
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:25pmIt’s up to them not to believe the truth… For me I believe in my lord and Jesus we are only one breath away from truth . I would hate to be on that sad side!!!! All we can do I proclaimed and sleek Gods word we realy can’t force someone to accept it!!! It has to be in their hearts and mind !!!! Pray for them!!!
Report Post »tamara13
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:24pmSorry to disagree but I feel the aethists have the right. No matter how lame their view.
Report Post »aChameleon
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:33pmLike them getting the Ten Commandments removed? Can’t have it both ways.
Report Post »qzak491
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:37pm.
ATHEISTS HAVE NO MORE RIGHTS THAN CHRISTIANS OR JEWS
If they are determined to take Christians or Jews rights away then theirs will be taken away. If we can‘t publically say anything about our faiths they can’t say anything about theirs. Let them think about that next time they bring a lawsuit against Christians or Jews.
ALSO The star of david is blue.
Report Post »Conservative New Yorker
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:50pmAtheists have the right to air their views BUT it is also the right of the landlord to approve or disapprove of anything to do with HIS property.
It‘s that pesky freedom and capitalism stuff that irks libs because they can’t control it…
Report Post »tzion
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 1:00pm@qzak491
Report Post »The Star of David is just a shape. The blue color is just how it is shown on the Israeli flag. Israeli ambulances have red stars (compare to red cross) and many Jewish women wear gold stars on necklaces.
COFemale
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 2:32pmOh they have the right to post the sign, but the owner of the billboard has the right to say NO, not on my property. See how that works Tamara13. It is called rights? Both sides have it. My rights don’t necessary trump your rights unless you are on my property. When you own the property and the billboard you can decline business. See how that works? Just because you want something, does not mean you will get it. We can tell you NO. From your post, you feel you are entitled to things because you want it. I guess your parents have never told you NO.
Report Post »momprayn
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:21pm”I think it’s your right to say that something is too offensive to the general community….I don’t have a problem at all with that decision.”
Report Post »LOL! Thank you!!! Great one. As a Christian who supports Israel (period) and also Messianic ministries, this is great news. I’m sure a good number of these atheists are anti-Semitic and just want to use them for their benefit to promote their agenda. Plus I pray that more Jews will wake up & realize how much this Obama regime is also against them and using them…. my prayer is all evil efforts be thwarted and what was meant to bring more harm by satan will be turned into good..
cookcountypatriot
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:09pmif you want to display your sign..i suggest you go buy your own building and display any message you what on it..oh whats that u say.?? your a 99 percenter and cant afford your own property…oh well,,it must suck to be you dahling……actually no matter where ur are in your life…it sucks to be u..
Report Post »justangry
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:21pmJust curious would you feel the same way if the roles were reversed? If athiests owned the buildings and wouldn’t allow pro religous material to be posted.
Report Post »MidWestMom
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:49pmA private property owner has the right to choose what is displayed on their property. Doesn’t matter what it is.
@justangry
Report Post »Yes, I’d say the same thing if the situation was reversed.
tzion
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:56pm@Justangry
Report Post »Why would I want to put pro-religion material on an atheist building? Seems counter intuitive to me. If it‘s not public property then they can’t say it’s their right to post there.
justangry
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 1:30pm@Midwestmom, I agree. Private property is just that… private.
@TZION, Just asking. I’m a straight shooter, so you have to accept that it was merely curiousity and not read anything else into it.
Report Post »lukerw
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:04pmSo… are the Athists saying… Atheism is a Religion… where God is Self and they are Gods?
Report Post »justangry
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:19pmPerhaps that’s what the billboard was going to say, but this guy was saying that his right to free speach was violated by religous bigots, and the rabbi in the article seems to support such censorship.
Report Post »tzion
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:25pm@justangry
Report Post »The landlord was within his rights to deny them. Would Jews be guilty of “religious bigotry” if they had refused to place the sign on their synagogue’s property? If it’s not public property they can turned away by the owner.
KLJOY
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:26pmExactly. At least they are admitting that atheism is a religion.
Report Post »HorseCrazy
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:38pmwhy because they don’t agree are the jews bigots? how? I love when there is no rational answer in a disagreement the name calling that begins. typical liberal when the argument cannot be one on fact or logic cry scream yell and name call
Report Post »justangry
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 12:45pmI restated the argument of athiest. I didn’t express my oppinion. My oppinion is if it’s private property, they have the right to post or not post anything they want. Much like the Blaze is entitled to censor what we contribute. If it were my site, or building I personally wouldn’t censor anyone whether I agreed with them or not.
Report Post »lukerw
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 1:03pmIf they are Gods… why not just make the other Religions “go away”?
Report Post »MammalOne
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 1:11pmAnyone who calls athiesm a religion has no idea what they’re talking about. The statement doesn’t even make sense.
Report Post »SacredHonor1776
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 1:42pmCool, Jusy Angry? Would you allow people to print graffiti on your building? It is after all just a message?
Or what if the KKK or some other white supremist wanted to put up a billboard promoting there beliefs?
You do realize that sometimes a person can be accused of promoting whatever they allow to be advertised. Sort of like advertisers who pull ads supporting controversial programming, if they feel the audience will assume they support the program.
Report Post »justangry
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:52pm@Sacredhonor, That’s a lot of “what ifs”, but I’ll play along. Graffiti is vandalism, so I’d call the cops and file a complaint. I’m on the fence about the KKK scenario for reasons you mentioned tbh. I don’t like their message and think hate speech is much different than questioning the existence of a god. Principles would say to allow it, asking for an insane amount of extra cash to compensate for any damage it would cause to my business, but I would probably compromise my principles in this case. I never said I was perfect.
Report Post »SacredHonor1776
Posted on March 10, 2012 at 12:27pmI’ve noticed that qutie a few Occupiars like to put graffiti on the foreclosed houses they attempt to Occupy (‘squat’ in (in all its double entendres))…
http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/426332_195239627247637_123047804466820_286352_1199456305_n.jpg
Report Post »