A small city in heavily Christian northern Florida is about to become home to the first public monument in the United States dedicated to atheism. Florida members of American Atheists, a national advocacy group, plan to erect a 1,500-pound granite display in front of the Bradford County Courthouse in Starke, Fla., next month, opposite a controversial year-old display of the Ten Commandments outside the same courthouse. "We'd rather there be no monuments at all, but if they are allowed to have the Ten Commandments, we will have our own," said Ken Loukinen, the director of regional operations for American Atheists who designed the monument. The new structure will feature quotes related to secularism from Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin and American Atheists founder Madalyn Murray O'Hair on a 4-foot-high panel, alongside a bench. It will stand in a small square in front of the courthouse, opposite the 5-foot, 6-ton Ten Commandments monument sponsored by a Christian group. The dueling monuments in Starke are part a growing number of conflicts about public displays of religion. In February, a district judge dismissed an American Civil Liberties Union lawsuit and ruled that another Ten Commandments display in front of a courthouse in northwestern Florida's Dixie County could stay put. Controversies have also erupted this year over Ten Commandments displays in public schools in Oklahoma and Pennsylvania. American Atheists sued Bradford County last July, saying the Christian monument in front of the county courthouse was a public endorsement of religion. In response, the county asked Community Men's Fellowship, the organization that sponsored the display, to take it down. But the fellowship replied by saying it had "prayerfully considered" the request and would not comply. The county and American Atheists went to a court-ordered mediation in March and settled upon the atheists getting their own monument. Will Sexton, an attorney who represented the county in the settlement, said it never intended to sponsor any religion with the Ten Commandments monument, nor is it endorsing secularism with the new atheist display. "In October 2011, the county adopted a set of monument placement guidelines that created what we saw as a free speech forum in the courtyard," he said. Sexton explained that private groups can apply to place a monument in the space, and that signs on display indicate that any such works do not represent the position of the county. The county's free speech forum guidelines say monuments must commemorate "people, events and ideas which played a significant role in the development, origins or foundations of United States of America or Florida law, or Bradford County," cannot be permanent and cannot be "libelous, pornographic or obscene." Sexton said the atheists' planned monument met the requirements. "What the atheists agreed to is something they could have originally been approved for without a year of money and litigation," he added. A representative of Community Men's Fellowship did not respond to phone calls from The Huffington Post, but the organization posted a statement on its Facebook page after the settlement was reached saying that "God worked this out." "On the very first day we were informed of the lawsuit, [member] Dan spoke up and said he believed the Lord had given him a word on how to deal fight this thing. He was right. Praise God," the statement read. "We want you all to remember that this issue was won on the basis of this being a free speech issue, so don't be alarmed when the American Atheists want to erect their own sign or monument. It's their right. As for us, we will continue to honor the Lord and that's what matters." The Stiefel Freethought Foundation, a group led by millionaire atheist Todd Stiefel, funded the new atheist monument to the tune of $6,000. It will include a quote from the Treaty of Tripoli, a 1796 peace agreement between the U.S. and North African Muslims, which has become a rallying point for atheists because of its declaration that "the government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion." The display will also feature Biblical quotes that supporters say correspond to the Ten Commandments, such as Deuteronomy 13:10, which says to "stone him with stones" so "that he die" in reference to people who worship other gods. (The first commandment reads, "You shall have no other gods before me.") Loukinen, the organization's regional operations director, said American Atheists resorted to putting up its own monument only after trying to get the Christian one removed, and the group has no plans to erect any more monuments in other cities or states. There is at least one other atheist monument in the U.S., on private land in Lake Hypatia, Ala. It's dedicated to "atheists in foxholes" and was constructed in 1999 by the Freedom From Religion Foundation. [HR][/HR] Kaleem, Jaweed. "Public Atheist Monument Going Up Near Courthouse In Starke, Florida, Is Country's First." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 31 May 2013. Web. 01 June 2013. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/...368319.html?ir=Miami&ref=topbar#slide=2518567
Whipee , we are going to show creationist , we can do it to. Why do you people fight those who wants to believe in something . How would be a world of only atheism would reign ? And would atheist system do to those who want to believe in something ?
In the spirit in which this monument is being raised, I am unopposed until such time as the erection of this monument has a negative or positive effect on my personal fitness coefficient. I offer the developers my warmest indifference.
The Only Problem .... I wouldn't object, but I'm not specifically atheist. Nor am I agnostic. I'm an "Apathetic"—I don't give a damn if God exists, as It is pointless. How about that? Fourteen years later, I finally manage an affirmative religious identity. Who'da thunk? At any whosit, the only problem I have is that by my personal view, the atheistic skepticism is well-tasked to diverse aspects of life having nothing to do with whether or not there is a Dog. I mean God. This is, of course, not at all a problem. Except that making a monument to it is sort of like trying to concretize the amorphous. Atheism should be apathetic toward God. As long as it exists primarily as an anti-identification against another sociocultural event it will remain subordinate to that relationship. Atheistic monuments are akin to Anarchistic governments, from that perspective. I mean, I get it, but doesn't it kind of undermine its own point? Whatever else, I would suggest that Atheism should not be formalized. Of course, that presents its own host of questions, but those can be addressed in due course. The point, as I would hope is obvious, is that the one thing Atheism should not become is an ossified ideological paradigm, a.k.a., a religion.
I couldn't care less that people want to be atheists, but why atheism wants to always talk about christianity? If they want to live a life without what ever they consider god, or what ever there beliefs are thats there business. I and you lot do not know what they mean by this, so i will not say anything. Saying your atheist is like saying your a theist, no one truly knows what you believe but you. So anyone taking just labels and claiming to know what they mean is wrong. What ever these people mean, may not be what you people think it means. Thats the things about this spiritual stuff. I could not care less personally about atheists, but why they obsess with theists beliefs? If your an atheist, you should not care what others believe unless someone is forcing you to believe something against your will. But like the catholic church says, your all gods children.
Definitely no double standards there… “This is Christian Billy; he can be open and dogmatic about his religious affiliation because he is Christian, Billy is being a good Christian. He is outspoken and truly a humble servant of the spreading the good news of God Almighty and his only begotten son Jesus Christ. He is also allowed to belittle and ridicule the Gods of other religions without negative repercussions because they are blasphemous sinners, Billy is a good Christian” “Atheist Joe is open about his atheism…why can’t he just let people believe what they want to believe, he is an arrogant god mocker who should just accept that he is the minority in a Christian nation and shut up about his infidel views. Joe is not to be trusted.” The most recent study was conducted by the University of Minnesota, which found that atheists ranked lower than "Muslims, recent immigrants, gays and lesbians and other minority groups in 'sharing their vision of American society.' Atheists are also the minority group most Americans are least willing to allow their children to marry." The results from two of the most important questions were: This group does not at all agree with my vision of American society... Atheist: 39.6% Muslims: 26.3% Homosexuals: 22.6% Hispanics: 20% Conservative Christians: 13.5% Recent Immigrants: 12.5% Jews: 7.6% I would disapprove if my child wanted to marry a member of this group.... Atheist: 47.6% Muslim: 33.5% African-American 27.2% Asian-Americans: 18.5% Hispanics: 18.5% Jews: 11.8% Conservative Christians: 6.9% Whites: 2.3% That’s not all then there are the special privileges that Christianity has in this country 1: Defenders of Christian privilege in the law commonly argue or assume that the absence of explicit endorsements of religion generally and/or their religion in particular (like in Ten Commandments monuments) is unconstitutional hostility towards their religion. This assumes the justification of privileges for Christianity because there are no endorsements of other religions, such as Hinduism, yet no one claims this as an example of hostility towards them. Christian Privilege and Public Schools: 2:There are many ways in which Christians have fought for Christian privilege in schools: organized prayers, using schools as permanent churches, Christian-specific prayers and speeches at graduations, holding graduations at churches, etc. It is argued that the religious preferences of the majority count for more than the religious equality of the minority. Non-Christians are told that they must be “tolerant” of Christians using the state to further their own religious interests. 3:The most visible example of attempts to assert Christian privilege in the political realm may be the efforts to insert sectarian prayers into political events, like town council or school board meetings. Rather than stick with generic prayers or even permit prayers from multiple religions, Christians insist that Christian-specific prayers are both appropriate and preferable. If the majority is Christian, then their religious beliefs should be accorded a privileged status by government bodies. 4:Cultural privileges for Christianity come up when Christians insist that their religion deserves special recognition, extra deference, and more respect. Sometimes, Christians act as though other religions are inferior and don’t merit equal consideration. Examples of this include the claim that only “Merry Christmas” is acceptable while “Happy Holidays” is not, or the idea that Christian holidays, but not non-Christian ones, can be recognized as government holidays. 5:A common defense of Christian privilege is the idea that Christians are a majority, and in a democracy, the majority rules. If Christians want to shape legal, political, and cultural institutions to express their religious values and to privilege both Christianity, that’s what being a Christian Nation is all about. In a liberal democracy, however, the rights and equality of all are protected. Christians can no more vote to privilege Christianity than whites can vote to privilege their race. 6:Is it possible that efforts to assert Christian privilege is a mask, conscious or unconscious, for other sorts of lost privilege that can’t be publicly asserted? Those who most often assert Christian privilege are also those who would benefit most from white privilege or male privilege. Some of the areas where Christian privilege is being asserted, like the context of equal rights for gays, are areas where male or white privilege would also make gains by implication. “Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet. Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich.” ― Napoleon Bonaparte
Practical Application Practical application, as far as I can tell, and that's a pretty good motivation. I'm forty. In my lifetime, a witch trial has occurred in the United States. In my lifetime, rock albums have been effectively banned from sale for offending Christian preferences. In my lifetime, books have been censored for offending Christian preferences. And think about the gay fray. Homosexual civil rights wasn't on the radar of most of my generation until about 1990-92, when Christians in Oregon and Colorado hoped to exclude gays from society. Indeed, if we want the irony, the current arc that leads to marriage equality begins, for many of my generation, with a bunch of Christians in Oregon who tried to use the state ballot to censor a book from the Springfield Public Library. Do you know what Muslims, Jews, Witches, Hindus, atheists, and pretty much all my non-Christian American neighbors want from me when I go to the ballot box? Justice. Equality. What do American Christians want from me at the ballot box? Supremacist privilege. Indeed, it is quite apparent that what these Christians want is to be left in charge of everyone else and left alone. This is a problem. It is a functional problem. Think of it this way. There are three pieces of candy. I give you one, and take the other two. What? That's fair. That's equal. Right? You have candy, after all. And we're not equal unless I can have more candy than you. Why are you trying to oppress me? It is a functional problem: Disparity cannot be equality any more than square can be a circle. So, yes. Many people who are not Christians do, in fact, pay attention to what the Christians do.
Have you ever had to live in a place where they think you are a freak for not believing in God? Where they angrily tell you stories about hell and why you're going there?
Your mentality is similar to what the Bolshevics did to the believers in the former Soviet Union , They labeled them mentally incapable and sent the to a sanatorium or to jail . You are lucky the believers of the present don't practice inquisition .
Same mentality as believers have for non (or different) believers. Christians used to kill each other over disagreements about what language to pray in. God forbid (to use an expression) they should ever be taught to think for themselves. But they'd certainly like to.
Andy writes: I could not care less personally about atheists, but why they obsess with theists beliefs? If your an atheist, you should not care what others believe unless someone is forcing you to believe something against your will.[/B If you ceased shoving your religion in our faces then you would not arouse our ire. Atheists are a tolerant and peaceful lot, not naturally given to noisy protest. But when you violate the constitution of any secular nation by forcing proclamations and declarations of belief in the supernatural into public areas, onto coins and banknotes, onto government stationery, into parliaments and courts of law, then we will bring those violations to the attention of the appropriate authorities. Generously scattered throughout every village, town and city are places of worship that enjoy unprecedented privilege among all the other tax-paying edifices. Why can't you confine your incantations, rituals and obsequious cringeing to those places? Why are you obsessed with atheist convictions? Quite frankly I couldn't care less what you get up to in your places of worship. But why do you want everyone else to catch your disease? In my 75 years I've walked past many a church but never once heard laughter beckon from within. Why do you want everyone else to be as miserable as you lot are? I am an atheist and really I don't care what others believe unless some of you try to force me to believe something against my will. If your lot commit verbal and visual violence on me then I reserve the right to retaliate.
At the given age I could care less if you are an atheist , but don't force my children to believe something which is an hypothesis.
OriginalBiggles Religious privilege is written into our Constitution, unfortunately. As it has been interpreted(wrongly, IMHO)our Christian and, to a limited extent, Jewish faiths have tax free status to the point that the Mormon Church owns 25% of the entire state of Utah(as just one example). They not only pay no taxes but operate profit making enterprises and blatantly political organizations(often with fig leafs attached to hide their...er, junk). Other religions share some of the blowby(no taxes, etc.)but the Christians have forced their religion and it's values on all. Homosexuals have been accepted in many great civilizations, but the laws against them have been the result of undue Christian influence in a supposedly free country. Prohibition(of alcohol in the past, marijuana now)is the result of undue political influence and a basic misunderstanding of what the word "freedom" means(hint, it does not mean being free to tell others what to do or not do to themselves BY LAW). It really doesn't matter much what any theist believes(though I cringe to see them have children, sometimes,<cough> Fred Phelps<cough>),our country must tolerate their...er, foibles. But, by the same token, they must be made to tolerate others who think differently. Much of the whole Civil Rights era struggles have been about restricting one set of religious zealots trying to impose their ideas of morality on everyone. Even the Civil War was fought between competing interpretations of the Bible(which provides LOTS of support for slavery, by the way. Even price lists). Our country was founded by people trying to get away from the incestuous relationship between church and state that had engulfed Europe, if we do nothing it will do the same to us. GrumpyPlease Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
arauca Why not, you do? At least scientific hypotheses are testable, religious claims are not. At least scientific hypotheses are supported by evidence, religious claims? Not so much. GrumpyPlease Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
You mean gravity? Perhaps they could teach intelligent falling (being pushed to the Earth by spirits) and then let kids make their own decisions.
If you "could care less" Then what is it that you care least about? Anyway, I'm comforted that you're sensible enough to see things of value in atheism. May one request that you elaborate on those things? Atheists, unprovoked and quietly minding their own affairs, have never "forced" their views on anyone. There has never been, nor will there ever be, an evangelical facet to atheism. Atheism has no inherent doctrine or dogma, no anthems or hymns, no rites or ritual, it has never uttered a clarion call to arms or to man the barricades, never has its praise been screamed as it lay about with sword and spear on its own as well as the infidel. Atheism has no temples, no edifices of mystery and obscene opulence. It worships no grotesque idols, it wears no hilarious garb, it has no rigid misogynistic hierarchy. But most significantly, it is free of all canon but especially that which provides a breeding atmosphere for carnal pedohebephilic temptation and the means by which such behaviour is fostered and hidden. No, we don't want to "force" anyone to forgo their beliefs. We do ask however that you cease provoking us to respond to your infantile misinterpretation of the Theory of Evolution and your equally infantile misinterpretation of atheism as a belief. It is not a belief but the utter repudiation of a particular belief, a particularly offensive belief to many. When your children go to school at some stage they will encounter the disciplines of science The subject of evolution may well be in the curriculum. Its study is science. It is a theory within science that has never encountered contradictory evidence in its 150 years of scientific investigation and research. It is so well evidenced that science declares that it would be utterly perverse to not treat it as fact. Its veracity is the basis of many other scientific disciplines that treat it as fact and which suffer no contradsictions because of this. You, of course, are completely within your rights to counter that learning in the confines of your home and your church as you have to deprive them of any scienctific understanding of anything. But you have no right to deny such learning of scientific fact to all others. When you try to influence how science must be regarded and what it comprises then you incur the wrath of a foe who will be not only implacable but one who will inevitably prevail against ignorance and superstition. There are sufficient of us who realise humankind is doomed if we do not.
Grumpy, I'm indebted indeed to you for opening my eyes to some of the outrageous inroads made by the organised religions contrived by gullible and obsequious political figureheads. I have referred to this phenomenon previously as "corporatised superstition". This awful palsy of the mind delights in marginalising minorities like homosexuals and others of eccentric views and behaviours [I rejoice in being so categorised]. Whereas humankind revels in diversity in all aspects of life, these closed-minded minions abhore it, execrate it, clamour in high dudgeon against it. Conform or be the victim of bigotry and prejudice, ostracisation and violence. Thus, though the free-thinkers of this world regret it, we must tolerate such religious excrescences as the Fred Phepses among us. Howeve tasteless and offensive they are, they embarass even the most strident of their co-religionists. You write: Our country was founded by people trying to get away from the incestuous relationship between church and state that had engulfed Europe, if we do nothing it will do the same to us. The misery they create among fellow human beings feeds their opinion of enjoying special status and the beaming approval of a power vastly greater than anything on Earth. This terrible pathology of the mind must be eradicated eventually. How shall we face the wonder,awe and fearsomeness of space exploration successfully? Facing the future with confidence and trust in our own abilities in a Universe indifferent and pitiless or kneeling, abjectly declaring our worthlessness and tearfull pleading for guidance in sure and certain hope............? That "sure and certain hope" phrase really fries my fritters! What a deceitful and contrived juxtapositioning of contradictions!
