By James Townsend
Until recently, chalking Bible verses around campus has typically been a non-issue; however, it became one on Friday when a group of atheist students chose to do the same.
After spotting a controversial verse written on the sidewalks by members of Salisbury University’s Campus Crusade for Christ, members of the Atheist Society planned a counterstrike, using the Bible itself as ammunition. The students chalked out their own selected verses, exhibiting the more controversial aspects of the Bible.
The Atheist Society claimed that the verse, Psalm 53:1, written by CRU members, which states: “The fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God.’ They are corrupt, and their ways are vile; there is no one who does good,” was a direct attack on their beliefs.
“It’s just offensive,” said John Tully, a member of the Atheist Society and frequent contributor to The Flyer. “People think just because it’s the Bible it gets a free pass. It shouldn’t. People shouldn’t be tolerant of that kind of hateful behavior.”
He says the verse wasn’t of particular offense to him but rather worries new atheists who aren’t as open with their beliefs yet may feel targeted.
“It’s just hurtful to their self-image as an atheist,” Tully said. “They should feel accepted on the campus, but instead there is this hate speech chalked everywhere.”
Junior Chris Sufczynski is in charge of the CRU Chalking Ministry. Although the group is made up of CRU members, he stresses that it is not an officially endorsed branch of the organization.
“I’m not here to attack (atheists),” Sufczynski said. “I’m not attacking anyone in any way. I just want to put out the truth of the scriptures. I didn’t do it in retaliation to their views; I did it because I love Jesus.”
Tyler Suplee, vice president of CRU and an emcee at their weekly Thursday fellowship, defends the chosen verse.
“It’s tough to hear, but it’s biblical,” Suplee said. “According to what we believe, the main message is that everyone lives for eternity; it’s just a matter of where you’re going to spend it. They might not want to hear it, but it’s the truth.”
The Atheist Society responded by chalking verses such as Deuteronomy 22:28, which says that if a woman is raped, she must marry her rapist, as well as verses supporting slavery and the killing of homosexuals and disobedient children.
While chalking, the group was approached by several students, one of whom told them they were going to hell. It wasn’t long after before they were reported and University Police arrived on the scene.
After seizing their IDs, the students were called into the office of the Dean of Students, Edwin Cowell.
“He told us we hadn’t broken any rules and that we were free to continue chalking tomorrow,” said Matt Boyd, a member of the Atheist Society who helped with the campaign. “But he still ordered horticulture to remove the verses.”
Horticulture later washed away verses from CRU as well, though both groups may resume writing chalk messages around campus.
Suplee says CRU members chalk verses around campus to help promote CRU and inspire people to learn more about what the Bible has to say.
“We’re not trying to trick anyone,” Suplee said. “We don’t want to give people one side of the message. People should know the truth. If you don’t fully understand it you should investigate it yourself or come to CRU to ask questions.”
Sufczynski claims that while the Atheist Society has the right to write what they want, they are misrepresenting the Bible’s teachings.
“I feel they’re just misquoting and paraphrasing the Bible,” Sufczynski said. “They’re taking bits and parts without any context and turning it into their own meaning.”
Boyd feels similarly, claiming that Christians often pick and choose the lighter aspects of the Bible, while choosing to ignore the bad.
“We saw people trying to stomp out the chalk from the pavement,” Boyd said. “And that’s the reaction people should be having. They should be embarrassed. They should be offended. I was offended with what I was writing. The Bible is not full of good things.”
The Atheist Society resumed chalking Saturday afternoon, and the Chalking Ministry expects to do the same later this week.
4. December 2011 at 3:33 pm
Atheist Society: Nobody judges you because you are Atheist, thats your own choice. Stop trying to get attention. You atheists sure do love to start arguments. If you don’t believe in the Bible, why does it hurt you so much?
4. December 2011 at 7:16 pm
The problem is that people do discriminate against atheists just as you are right now. You are saying that atheists are attention-whores that like to argue.
7. December 2011 at 9:00 pm
they are, its all over their fb page
4. December 2011 at 4:04 pm
Phrase that same question to a Langston Hughes, a black atheist who championed the harlem renaissance–consider that regardless of his or anyone else’s belief in the validity of the Bible, it was still used as justification by the KKK. It was the only book black slaves were allowed to own because of verses that instruct slaves to obey their earthly masters as they would obey Christ. Are you so ignorant of the Bible’s teachings and the atrocities that it has commanded throughout history? What a question!
4. December 2011 at 4:59 pm
The problem here is and i think always will be with religious arguments is interpretation of scriptures and its meaning. The atheist quoting the scriptures of Deuteronomy 22:28, which says that if a woman is raped, she must marry her rapist, as well as verses supporting slavery, and the killing of homosexuals and disobedient children wasn’t a very tactical ploy if the point was to counter what cru has chalked. Surely if one looks at words and takes them literally for what they say it easy to get a false uniformed conclusion of what any scripture could mean. This is true also about any information one reads. Surely what Deuteronomy could be trying to convey in an underline message is forgiveness, and that humans are fallible, meaning capable of mistakes.That one needs to strive to be able to forgive and therefore eventually love someone who has hurt them in the past. Now an atheist would fire back laughingly, most likely saying that this is insane and impossible. I would say then is it impossible to completely abolish racism in the world? Most would agree yes and say that it would be insane to think other wise. So then i would challenge the atheist then to tell me that an attempt to abolish racism would be insane,just because of the fact that it may not me completely possible. After all that is what he wants, the atheist wishes his view to be accepted as a valid view point by all. But is this completely possible? No so therefore by logic of an atheist who would say Christianity requires insane and impossible things of us therefore it cant be true. Wouldn’t it therefore be insane to be an atheist thus rendering atheist-ism invalid? I can come up with countless examples of insane things being an atheist would require one to do. For example if one denounces God and or a being higher then himself. Then this therefore implies that man is the most absolute being. This to me is insane because, how could we be so absolute if we cannot explain our existence here 100 percent. So many things as man we cannot explain, but yet according to an atheist there cannot be a divine deity. This in my opinion alludes to fact surely their must be a being and or something divine out there. Whether you wanna call it god that’s up to you, but denounce the idea of a being higher than you. Is to claim your own existence as man as the most ultimate thing, yet you cannot explain it which sounds foolish to me. I am not to be confused with a religious fanatic here, i am strictly speaking from a rational standpoint from information i have received. Even though i do believe in God.
4. December 2011 at 5:46 pm
I won’t argue with theology with you because the fact that you are a Christian is no issue to me. I will however argue against your methods, your group has been spreading the gospel in a caustic and condescending manner. To quote Gandhi, who according to your verse was a corrupt fool who did no good, “I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.” You claim to preach Christianity, but from my readings and studying of the Bible you are nothing like him, where the Bible tells of Jesus accepting even prostitutes and thieves during his time on earth, you instead attack people of different beliefs. As far as your concern with Bible verses being taken out of context, I read the entire chapter of deuteronomy, and it lists various ways to handle rape and how to handle each different type of case. Deuteronomy is predominantly a book of laws in the old testament and I think it is much more of a stretch for all of it to be an allegory about forgiveness when it lists passages about stoning an engaged virgin for being raped in a city because she obviously wasn’t screaming for help. So now that we have examined the verse used by my friend John and his fellow atheists and the chapter it was in to find the context, I really don’t see where you have any kind of argument. The verse CRU left was obviously an outright attack on atheists and you cannot blame it on contexts when it openly slanders not only atheists, but anyone who does not believe what you do. Evaluate what you are doing because I’m pretty sure if Jesus does exist he would be disgusted by your methods and appalled you would use his name as a licensee to spread hate speech.
4. December 2011 at 5:55 pm
If you want to use a higher power to explain our own existence, then there has to be some science to back it up. What is this god made of? Does it have a physical being? Why is there not a shred of physical evidence that it exists? How / Why does it have its powers? Why does 4/5 of the world follow a different, mutually exclusive higher power? Simply saying that God created everything does not necessarily solve your paradox because it creates a lot of questions. This would prove that believing in a god does not really explain our existence 100% since the evidence is not 100% in the existence of a god. Most people like the idea that there is a higher power and that their good deeds are being seen and possibly rewarded, but in order to do that you have to ignore the clear lack of support for the claim and existence of scientific / philosophical support for the contrary view.
5. December 2011 at 11:55 am
Read the bible, it will tell you who God is. It is faith that we believe in God, Hebrews 11 talks about faith. I would like for you to check it out.
4. December 2011 at 7:12 pm
“Surely if one looks at words and takes them literally for what they say it easy to get a false uniformed conclusion of what any scripture could mean.” If you are saying that certain parts the bible should not be interpreted literally, should anything in the bible be interpreted literally? I find it laughable that christians choose only certain parts of the bible to represent christianity. Also, there does not have to be a higher being because our existence can be explained by science. Just because the chance of humans actually existing is so small does not make it impossible. I would venture to say that the chance of God, as represented in the bible, existing is just as small. I say this because of the historical background of the bible(when it was written, by whom, and alterations over time).
4. December 2011 at 4:59 pm
Sufczynski: “I did it because I love Jesus.”
I think he tapped into something here, considering the extraordinary amount of disgusting practices that that little statement has justified.
4. December 2011 at 5:13 pm
@Tony Benson
How can you say that because the bible condones killing homosexuals and disobedient children is all just a metaphor for forgiveness? That doesn’t make any sense. That seems to be a messed up kind of forgiveness…
4. December 2011 at 5:20 pm
Who cares? Atheists suck.. Believers suck. Both are hypocrites. U mad over chalk, bro?
4. December 2011 at 5:49 pm
We all know John Tully is going to be arguing about this one. Let him have his attention, that’s all he wants after all. You Atheists are so annoying. I’m more fond of Scientologists and Satanists than I am of you guys..
4. December 2011 at 6:36 pm
Sweetie, this annoyance you feel is because you lack the intelligence or verbal skills to adequately participate in debates with Tully. This is not our problem. When you can adequately and intelligently support your beliefs, come back. Until then, let’s let the big kids handle this, okay?
4. December 2011 at 6:41 pm
Both of you, cool it with the trolling.
4. December 2011 at 6:47 pm
Problem?
;] Kidding. I formally apologize to the Anon. I only did it because I love Jesus. <3
4. December 2011 at 11:57 pm
So your response to them doing hate speech is to add more hate speech? okay, this is starting to make so much more sense
4. December 2011 at 9:14 pm
Do you even know what satanists ACTUALLY believe?
“The Satanist understands that all Gods are fiction, instead of bending a knee in worship to—or seeking friendship or unity with—such mythical entities, he places himself at the center of his own subjective universe as his own highest value. We Satanists are thus our own “Gods,” and as beneficent “deities” we can offer love to those who deserve it and deliver our wrath (within reasonable limits) upon those who seek to cause us—or that which we cherish—harm.”
-Magus Anton Szandor LaVey (Founded the church of satan)
4. December 2011 at 6:05 pm
“For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him.” Leviticus 20:9
As others have noted, how can this be a metaphore of any kind, let alone forgiveness?
Further more, you make the assumption that atheists believe man is the absolute being. I do not believe in any kind of absolute being. I believe human beings are more intelligent and better with tools than any other creature on the planet, but that doesn’t mean I think humans know everything. They clearly do not. Even if we currently cannot explain our existence 100% (or various other things about us), that doesn’t mean that the explanation must be a higher being did them.
4. December 2011 at 6:13 pm
hey sarah i was given the wrong vs over Facebook to look at so i was looking a completely different verse so what i said applies to a differnt verse lol. but this the verse that is in question i believe. “If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels[a] of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.”
4. December 2011 at 6:17 pm
so would say this verse is evil and immoral because it forces a woman to be with a man that has raped her am i correct in that assumption?
4. December 2011 at 6:26 pm
I would say so, yes. Which is why we’ve chosen to write it.
4. December 2011 at 6:29 pm
haha at my facebook buddy as a fellow philosopher i agree with what you say. When asked what u are asking Christians are going to say they dont need any physical or tangible evidence of god because they have faith. Which is by definition the belief in things unseen. Which necessarily will never be enough for a scientist who seeks to measure test study put limits on things. As a student of anthropology and a philosophy i have looked at this discussion both scientifically and through laws of reason. Used them both to decide what i believe i need not present you with physical evidence i can only encourage you to gather what you know and then present what you know and be to be open to on coming views. Therefore creating intelligent discussions like this one so maybe just maybe we will reach some truth
4. December 2011 at 6:43 pm
if the case is that atheists are just “trying to get attention”, then what are christians doing?
the same damn thing.
Christians meddle in everything that gets their panties in a bunch, they try to press their views into legal issues such as abortion rights and gay marriage.
Are atheists using their beliefs to spread hate and drastically effect laws that effect everyone? no, I would say they aren’t, I cant think of one law or piece of legislation, local or federal, that atheists have continued to press on that directly effects those of the opposite opinions or beliefs. Even those who identify as only moderately religious usually do not meddle in things they really should not. There is separation of church and state for a reason.
I’m not saying that all christians or religious people meddle in such things, but batshit crazy wingdingers definitely are guilty of this. Most intelligent, moderate to non religious folk, respect that their is a separation between church and state and that everyone can live their own lives without being condemned by their religion or lack-there-of. They also understand that free speech is a two way street, where some will say that atheists are only trying to get attention, they usually realize that christians who are exercising that same free speech, should also be identified as doing the same thing. Though in my opinion, spreading ones beliefs should never be referred to as “just trying to get attention”, with either side of the matter. Last time i checked, religious people have been know to approach people in schools, malls and sometimes even going to peoples homes, to spread the word of their faith; this is exactly the same as what John Tully and friends have done, they are simply spreading their beliefs.
one last comment, we atheists can read(yep, it may shock you, but its true), we are intelligent(also may shock you…but also true), and we understand that things can have multiple meaning, but there are only so many ways you can slice a piece of bread and the same goes for biblical passages, if they are negative, they are negative, so stop making excuses for what has been written many years ago by insulting our ability to read and comprehend information.
A misunderstood breed we are, an over-understood breed religious folk are.
That was my 25 cents Bye bye
4. December 2011 at 6:53 pm
this gave me a good chuckle or two words so angry hahahah but at least it was an intelligent viewpoint and i appreciate all those
4. December 2011 at 7:16 pm
I believe there is something higher than us. but I lean more towards believing that its something scientific or within nature’s spirits of some sort, which is why I identify as atheist as opposed to agnostic, but I also dabble in some pagan beliefs, but regardless I feel closest to atheism. But I do not believe that man is the ultimate being. I am willing to accept being incorrect if it is proven that a higher being does in fact exist, however, I find it impossible think that this potential higher being would resemble that of the magical sky fairy that most Christians believe in and worship as well as their interpretations of “gods word” that spreads such hate.
Blind, Stiffly closed-minded, and unintelligent faith is what disgusts me the most. Open minded people religious and not are a breath of fresh air, it is those people who truly earn my respect.
4. December 2011 at 6:52 pm
The words taphas and shakab that are used for the word rape in the languages that the Bible was written in, as it was not English… can be used to mean to catch, grab, to relax/rest with, to lie in dead with, to be lain with sexually, blah blah blah.. You can’t take what the verse says in English as literal when that might not be what it was meant to say. Further, if looked at for period and culture, telling a man he can’t divorce her no matter what for the rest of his life is clearly revoking most rights men had and still have in many foreign cultures. In nigeria you can legally behead your wife if she doesn’t bare you a son.. So… though the culture may not be for women, which is obviously not right, but was the law of the time.. they’re basically saying if you have sex with a virgin, it’s your responibility to support her for the rest of your life and you’re never allowed to leave her.
Not really good grounds for disproving the entire Bible.
Bottom line, whether the athiests were looking into the Bible to get the verses for good or harm, they were still reading the Bible. Even if only a few verses. Made them hate christians more? Christians are still doing their job. Whether without cooth or not. Making “non-believers” investigate God. Once they do that, it’s the others decision to believe or not.
4. December 2011 at 7:21 pm
2points
4. December 2011 at 7:21 pm
Opinions and beliefs without true investigation are irrelevant; to question or argue without research is tactless, ignorant and will not get anyone anywhere.
4. December 2011 at 7:34 pm
2pts
5. December 2011 at 12:01 am
The same language is used later to describe a woman being stoned to death if she’s raped and doesn’t cry out for help–if she was just being lied upon or relaxed with, why would her crying out for help be a question?
Also, if this is a commandment of God, it ought to be morally objective and thus unchanging.
4. December 2011 at 7:16 pm
Arguing over the existence of god is dumb. It only works as an intellectual exercise as people have already come to their own conclusions. I happen to be an atheist because I am not a child and realize there is no man sitting in the clouds who gives a **** whether I choose to jerk off or not. I digress. The real point is being obnoxious about your beliefs is obnoxious. Christians are unbelievably annoying but that doesn’t give atheists the right to parade around like dip ***** writing in chalk. Let the crazy Christian people do their thing, they aren’t attacking you they are just being odd. In conclusion Tony Benson needs to take a class in logic because he/she/it has no idea what he/she/it is talking about. One of the most idiotic arguments I have ever read. It was almost funny how illogical the logic was. If you have kids I would suggest getting them a tutor. No offense but your pretty dumb. Speaking of rape Tony, you absolutely raped the transitive property. The whole “I challenge an atheist” bit was also ****ing hilarious. I challenge you to read an entire book! NO PICTURES!
4. December 2011 at 7:36 pm
my internet feelings are hurt? man why did do that lol
4. December 2011 at 7:37 pm
let me get your name so i can sit down and take a logic class with u.
4. December 2011 at 7:40 pm
I do not typically argue over the existence of god. I usually only argue the logic behind things like separation of church and state, abortion rights and gay marriage. I also argue the fact that when it comes to media, when atheists speak out, they are condemned, and when the religious speak out about their views, they are praised or backed up/supported.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2011/12/04/if-they-can-quote-bible-verses-so-can-we/
4. December 2011 at 7:52 pm
FURTHERMORE! Why do I need to have an “intelligent discussion” about something I know with 100% certainty that I am correct about. Well maybe I don’t know with a 100% certainty and I think that means God exists or something (I guess that makes sense to some people, but I don’t speak *** hole so I’m not sure). Again I digress. The point being is that if all the evidence points to the fact that the bible is just a very interesting book on morality (entirely made up but interesting nonetheless) why do I have to respect your viewpoint. If I choose to believe in the boogeyman I shouldn’t expect to have people respect my viewpoint. And when I find myself in a logical trap or looking at ALL the evidence that is against me and say “well I have faith that the boogeyman is real, and he cares about me” you should all say…”your a ****ing idiot there is no boogeyman that **** is just made up to scare people”. IN CONCLUSION. I am smarter than all. Kelly also had poor arguments. Writing in chalk is dumb. This article is not interesting.
4. December 2011 at 8:11 pm
Dude, I’m on your side. I do not believe in the magical sky fairy. I wasn’t trying to make an argument with you or against your beliefs. So dont attack me in your little angry rant, if you’re “annoyed” by this discussion then just exit this browser and stop reading. In my above post, I was addressing both extremes of the discussion. The discussion is not arguing whether god exists(that is not what we are arguing), it is discussing whether or not one or both parties involved in this article are in the wrong. stop trolling.
4. December 2011 at 8:18 pm
also respecting someones viewpoint does not necessarily mean that I give into it or believe it. respecting someone’s viewpoint, means that you wont treat someone with disrespect just because they are religious. my friend is a mormon, she doesnt push her beliefs on me and i don’t sit around all night telling her how batshit crazy she is for wearing her “magic underwear” and other ass backwards mormon beliefs(at first i kind of mentioned that it conflicts with my beliefs but the subject was dropped when we both decided not to rant to each other).
its a respect for the person. you may not respect the religion, but you must respect the person, unless they are acting like an ass or mistreating you. my mormon friend is a good person, with a good heart, therefore I cant bring myself to dislike her for her religion.
THAT is what people mean when they say to respect religious beliefs.
4. December 2011 at 8:14 pm
As a christian, I think cru is completely out of line. If you can’t take the heat, get out of the kitchen. I don’t understand how they feel that attacking people who have differing opinions than yours is okay. And to say that the verses that the atheist group chalked were paraphrased, or taken out of context, just shows their own ignorance.
4. December 2011 at 8:20 pm
thank you for being a level headed religious person.
4. December 2011 at 8:22 pm
No problem! Were not all crazy. (Just most of us)
4. December 2011 at 8:24 pm
Yeah, I am open minded enough to not condemn all religious people to the “batshit crazy” category. As much as I do not believe, I have the most respect for open minded religious people, it shows a much higher level of intelligence.
4. December 2011 at 9:04 pm
And I understand that there are beliefs that differ from mine, and I am definitely open to the fact that I could be wrong. (It happens quite a lot). And I don’t think going around telling other people that they are going to burn in the fiery pits of hell because they aren’t Christians like me, is a very christian like way of trying to get someone interested in your religion. And if CRU had not written spiteful things meant to hurt and ostracize people, this would be a non-issue. As it is, I would never in a million years join their group.
5. December 2011 at 9:59 am
You will not remain a christian for long. I suspect the only reason you are is because of your family.
17. June 2012 at 12:45 pm
How shallow and riducilous of you.God really has removed your brain hasn’t he.I live a good life because I enjoy it.You live a good life because you are scared of hell.Hows your fake existence sweetheart?
19. June 2012 at 2:35 am
As atheists we apecct that bad people will do bad things and not be punished. Since we do not believe in a heaven or hell, we (atheists) apecct our own sins’ (we call if simply bad behavior’). We own’ it. When people believe in an afterlife, they are more willing to do things in this life that affect others well-being negatively. To me it’s selfish behavior to do things to get yourself’ into a mythical heaven that no one can prove exists.
4. December 2011 at 8:52 pm
I’m sorry I directed my anger at you Tony Benson. You didn’t deserve it. It wasn’t my intention to hurt your feelings. It was actually but now that I did it I feel bad. I was just bored and its fun to make fun. My new enemy is Kelly. Quite annoying with the I heart open minded people stuff. That’s really interesting. I like dogs who treat people fairly! I don’t know what trolling means. I typically don’t write on these blogs because my opinion is generally the only one that interests me. And my roommates, he’s cool. And because your on my side doesn’t mean you make good arguments. I think you saying a magical sky fairy is demeaning to religious people and on behalf of all of them I am giving you the finger(Through the internet). In summation I and only I am correct regardless of whether you agree with me or not. Tony Benson…my bad man. I have been drinking and watching football all day. Your kids don’t need a tutor. Your argument was only half bad. I didn’t mean to swear. I would love to take a logic class with you but I don’t meet up with people from the internet… something about not liking to get stabbed. Read Bertrand Russell. Or just Wikipedia his stuff because he uses big words. I did it again. My name is Kyle by the way. Any who that’s all for now.
5. December 2011 at 12:53 am
yes, because it tooootally isnt demeaning to sit there and say that christians are annoying, or sit here and call all the atheists dipshits and assholes. yeah. I’m pretty sure that makes you also the demeaning one, it also makes you pretty damn rude.
5. December 2011 at 5:06 pm
Sarcasm goes right over your head. I’m quite aware I am being both rude and obnoxious. I am also quite aware that what I said was tooooootally super duper mean. And I’m sorry. I agree with most of what is being said but it is TOOOOOOOTALLY fun to be an ass bag. So anyways you keep fighting the good fight, soon we will all be atheists and cynical and all the other stuff that we want. My I like dogs comment was oober funny. And I still don’t know what trolling means, but I’m assuming I might be doing it right now, so yeah, sorry for that again.
16. June 2012 at 11:59 pm
Yes I very much agree.Unfortunately people have made thvemelses fools to deny God.They may have good intentions like many of us do in general may do good,but at the end of the day we are all sinners atheists do not want to accept that.Being a good person is not enough, since at the end of the day we are all sinners and needJesus to save us.
18. June 2012 at 11:22 pm
I think we’re in agreement here then.I know of a nubemr of single issues that could certainly make sure I do NOT vote for a candidate.And I know a few issues that would make it very likely I’ve vote for a candidate.But I can not think of any single issue that would guarantee I’d vote for a candidate (with the possible exception of that issue being they are me).While on one level I can feel for the argument of single issue voting, I think when it really comes down to it, when Eddie Tabash and others make this case it always falls well short.
4. December 2011 at 9:19 pm
well kyle thanks for ur opinion man lol dont worry my feelings weren’t hurt i was just having fun with what u were saying man. and taken some symbolism and logic classes russell wasn’t a big part in neither of those i will be sure to look into what u are talking about.
4. December 2011 at 10:18 pm
Stop being polite. I was being rude and obnoxious. You should tell me to stuff Principia Mathematica up my pretentious ass.
My earlier point was that you stated to be an atheist one denounces god. Yup. But that doesn’t mean that “man is the most absolute being”. I don’t even know what you really mean by that. As an atheist I believe that man is a link in the chain of evolutionary biology. Not an absolute being. I don’t think most atheists agree with that particular view point. Looking for hypocrisy in the Atheist viewpoint is actually incredibly difficult. Its relatively straightforward. There exists a scientific answer for all of the worlds questions, some of which we are yet to discover. Trying to using logic principles in this case doesn’t make sense. On the other hand if you would like to turn that same logical perspective towards Christianity, its relatively easy to find numerous hypocrisy. For example God can’t really dictate morality because it is logically inconsistent for most people. If god decrees that to murder babies is moral, does that make it moral to kill babies? Is it moral because god says so, or does there actually exist a morality in an existential sense. If you would agree that morality exists free of God, then it becomes difficult to understand why one must obey this all knowing deity.
The bible is just a book. An amazing book that tells people how to live a relatively good life and achieve happiness (heaven can be interpreted as a state of mind not a place). Atheists tend to not give it enough credit and that is a serious flaw of people like those in the Atheist club. It is a 2000 year old book that is still relevant when looking at the human condition, pretty incredible.
4. December 2011 at 9:19 pm
i have taken*
5. December 2011 at 12:23 am
I love free speech.
But members of CRU, don’t take advantage of your rights to it. And same to the atheist club. We all know there are controversial versus of the bible, and if you chalk up the sidewalk with them, no student is going to appreciate that (that goes for both groups). Wanna get people interested in your group? Just ask them to attend an interest meeting.
Also, relax people, its just a damn book.
5. December 2011 at 1:02 am
“America is a place where Jewish merchants sell Zen love beads to agnostics for Christmas”
- John Burton Brimer
Does a cockroach debate such issues of heaven and hell? Does a butterfly question the morality of others? Does a tap worm detest an earthworm simpley because he is different? The fallacy lies in mans over analytical view of ones self. Too often we forget we are such simple primative creatures, motivated by pure animal instinct. Perhaps our greatest flaw, one the will inevitably lead to our downfall, is out intelligence and out ability to questions such issues
as to our existance.
A man should not be required to consult a “holy book”, whatever name it may take, to know that others should be treated with kindness, respect and above all; tolerance.
5. December 2011 at 11:10 am
I’ve noticed that not ONE comment here has mentioned Freedom of Speech, which is what this is really all about anyway. It doesn’t matter WHO it is, or WHAT they choose to believe in, but rather, that they are given the RIGHT to freely speak their minds as protected by the First Amendment to the US Constitution.
This should NOT be a debate about religion, or lack thereof, but of people’s rights as American citizens. Yes, we are all allowed our freedom of speech, but HATEFUL speech is clearly out of the question, and that’s the real crime here, not the beliefs. Do not attack the attacks, but rather their intentions. It is not as if these Bible quotes were taken at random, but they were chosen, with specific intent, to attack in a hateful manner and be aimed at a specific group.
To be honest, this is all really silly and I don’t really agree with what either group is doing, as it all involves attacks and hate. We should just embrace our own humanity and accept the fact that, in our short and minuscule lifetimes here on Earth, we have to live together and coexist, so we might as well make the most of it while we can.
Besides, it’s the Holiday season, we should all be cheery and be thankful for what we have, and not be hateful towards those who are different.
6. December 2011 at 2:21 am
“but HATEFUL speech is clearly out of the question”
If the 1st Amendment only protects speech that you do not find to be ‘hateful’, then what’s the point of protecting freedom of speech?
Freedom of Speech applies ESPECIALLY to things people do not like to hear, with some extremely narrow limitations. Don’t like it? Grow a thicker skin or move to a country that doesn’t permit such rights.
5. December 2011 at 2:39 pm
Everyone. Stop. The way I see it there’s two extremist sides having an all-out war and then the silent majority who doesn’t give the slightest of shits. What you guys are both doing by engaging in such a negative battle is alienating yourselves from the general population. Atheists, do you think that the best way to get converts to your “religion” is by quoting bad parts of the Bible? You’re just making yourself seem way out there and mean. Christians, is the best way to convert people to tell them that they’re going to go to hell? Focus on the whole love thing and Jesus. It’s a prettier message and it makes you guys seem like a good group of people.
If you guys do all that stuff there’s no need to bring the first amendment into it. Just act with common human decency. As much as you guys may hate each other, atheists are people too. And you know what? So are Christians. You may not like what the other has to say, but that’s their belief whether or not you think it’s wrong. Accept that they’re wrong, then walk away, regardless of what side you’re on. And there shouldn’t be any of this “Th3y strted ittt!!?!?$E#” bullshit. Just accept it and go on with your lives, and walk away with the knowledge that you’re the better human being.
I’m speaking as collateral damage in your war of stupidity. My main goal is not getting pissed off at the both of you on the way to class in the morning. I have 21 credits and a job and the last thing I need is my day ruined by two sides using the wrong tactics making themselves look crazy and losing converts in the process. So stop. Please. I can talk about the whole “not being dicks” thing, but trust me. One of my majors is Political Science. And attack campaigns just end up pissing everyone off. The more you guys do this the more it hurts your cause and the more people like me hate the both of you.
As for my religion? None of your business and not relevant in the slightest. The one thing I’ll give you is that I’m not a member of CRU or the Atheist Club. Why is it none of your business? Because I don’t feel the need to flaunt it. You guys may hate each other, but you’re exactly the same in that regard.
I speak for the silent majority, the collateral damage. Please stop.
5. December 2011 at 5:02 pm
Thanks for representing the silent majority. YOU DID SUCH A GOOD JOB. At first I thought it was a 7th grader writing but then I saw that you are a political science major. At least one of the top 18 most demanding majors in most colleges curriculum. As a leadership and arts and crafts DOUBLE MAJOR I think you have annoying opinions. The one way to solidify yourself as an idiot is to claim that you are an expert because you majored undergraduate at an average university… Trust me I’m an arts and crafts major I KNOW.
5. December 2011 at 5:58 pm
We can compare education all you want. I’m a Computer Science major, a Political Science major, and a Math minor. I never claimed to be an expert, all I know is that it’s common knowledge that attack ads in political campaign don’t help the cause and are only resorted to by candidates that are losing because they can’t win via normal channels. Instead of attacking me, attack my argument. Show me why I’m wrong instead of just claiming that I’m an idiot based on one sentence that you think is stupid. Back up your viewpoint and engage in debate.
5. December 2011 at 6:27 pm
I’m not really an arts and crafts major. Your points are fun but don’t make any sense. The reason Christianity is now one of the worlds major religions is because missionairies went out and converted native populations. So when they were being dicks preaching fire and brim stone sermons (something that you claim makes people not be Christian or something crazy like that) you should look at what actually proliferated Christianity throughout the world. It wasn’t always the happy go lucky version of Jesus, it was the crazy nut bag one.
Also there is a reason people utilize negative ads… Its because they are incredibly effective. If you want to look at the empirical evidence between voter apathy and negative advertisements then you wont repeat nonsense you learned in POSC101. I worked extensively on a few campaigns, although negative ads “annoy”people they are used as an effective tool to gain votes or limit oppositions. You gotta use your head. If they actually created an apathetic voter population than they wouldn’t really be used If you have figured it out 50 years of people far more intelligent than you would have figured it out. Read up on Lee Atwater (excuse the spelling) who reinvented negative ads as the RNC chair in the 80s and 90s. He was one of the more effective campaign managers in the latter half of the century and dirty as hell.
Also I don’t like you.
5. December 2011 at 6:45 pm
Good about the arts and crafts major, I wasn’t going to insult it but I’m glad that you’re smarter than that.
I know Christianity’s history. I also know that, to a large extent, my experience with Christianity has mainly been with the warm and fuzzy parts. There’s the people that go too far with the bad stuff, but I honestly believe that most Christians embrace the warm and fuzzy stuff without getting too deep into the fire and brimstone. The whole of Christianity doesn’t like being seen as that, even if it is a large part of it. Not that I’m defending Christianity, I just don’t think that they’re all fire and brimstone.
Fine. I’ll admit that I was wrong. Attack ads do work. I went off thirty seconds of research based on a perception that I thought was right, and that was stupid on me. You still have to convince me that an attack ad can alter religious preference, however. It makes sense when you attack an incumbent that did something stupid, but religion is a completely different beast and writing that God supports slavery on the ground in chalk does anything other than piss people off.
I didn’t like you. But you’re smart. You may have trolling tendencies, but you’re ok in my book.
6. December 2011 at 2:22 am
Your concern is noted.
8. December 2011 at 12:00 am
i think a lot of people are having these misconceptions that both sides the Christians and the atheist hate each other. this is a complete lie i a Christian and involved with this topic of chalking personally love the atheist and we have very friendly conversations with each other about our believes and other topics.
17. June 2012 at 1:06 pm
Other life is an ethical, soaicl and universal nessecity , as it would be the means of restitution and fair, and punishment of wrong on his sin and reward improved the kindness, Howshall a person like Hitler or Genghis Khan or Mussolini or others be punished on the atrocities they committed, do you as soon as their death, whether suicide ormurder this will be the only reward? Or should thatbe tortured in the fire terrible as it caused thetragedies and calamities of nations and peoples and individuals, children and all the damaged party, eventhe weight of the atom, and how the reward of do good in their lives to the people and to mankind did not give them a right to remuneration, that our faithwe Muslims had to be there day of Judgement dayfinds all of thegood work of his punishment and all the evil work of the evil as well as
19. June 2012 at 2:15 am
There are only 2 outcomes life after death or no aftlreife. Just because you believe one way or the other, does’nt make it so. According to your logic it doesn’t take a painter to have a painting; it doesn’t take a builder to have a building; it doesn’t take music to have a song, it doesn’t take a dreamer to have a dream nor does it take an eater to have a pile of shit. Your logic is just pushing reality a bit too far off the deep end.
5. December 2011 at 5:40 pm
The saying goes something along the lines of, “stay off the topic of politics and religion.” This is because you are not going to change someone if they are set in their beliefs. As far as this chalk war is concerned, both sides are being childish. To the christians, messages saying that those who do not follow your belief’s are fools and are doomed to hellfire and such is uncalled for. Freedom of speech aside for a moment. It is condescending and fear mongering. It is a belief, there is no data that con certifiably prove this. For as many people that Religion (in this instance christianity) has saved, there are just as many that have misinterpreted anything from a bible verse to a cloud in the sky and then done terrible things(see history of Christianity). While I understand that some of you feel compelled to save people from eternal fire and pain, to force that on someone, that idea, is rude and inconsiderate. It has been my experience at Salisbury that this is not what CRU does. I have friends who are in CRU, all of them very friendly and caring people. Which is why I am surprised at hearing CRU has written some of the things I just said (I don’t know this to be fact, I haven’t read all the articles above me, I’m just writing my thoughts regarding what I have heard).
To the Atheist club. Stop setting yourself back. A common misconception about atheists is that all of them hate other religions, that they are in a war with them. Some atheists do feel this way. In some cases it is feelings of disrespect from the religious side, a feeling that atheists are being cast as second class citizens, or angry godless heathens. This has given the group a bad name for a long time. Athiests should not force it on anyone. If you truly are interested in helping your belief be spread, you have to do it with a little more happiness. To go around and blatantly pull out parts of the bible that are crazy does nothing. Do those who did it really believe people will read it and think, “WOW look at this paragraph from the bible! It’s so negative towards women! I can’t follow this religion anymore!” No, it just makes your group come across as angry, resorting to insults as apposed to alternatives.
As I close, I relate a story that changed my perspective of religion. I am not a very religious person at all. I have no idea. It’s comforting to think that there may be something out there, but I digress. A few years ago a very close friend of mine passed away. I was an absolute wreck. I believe that I will never see him in any form ever again. I was also good friends with his parents. I remember at the wake and at the funeral, even after the funeral, the parents were by no means happy, but they were lifting the spirits of others. They believe that they will see their son again some day. That was what was preventing them from totally losing themselves in a sorrow no one should ever have. Yes they did mourn him, but they feel as though they talk to him through prayer. They feel as though he is watching out for them. That changed my perspective immediately. I had been angry at how I perceived major religions control people, I would be openly condescending at times about it, but to see what it did for his family, to see that kind of power. I wish I could feel it. I wish I could have had it then. And for anyone who has that kind of faith in something that it can take you out of the darkest places imaginable, good for you. Seriously. Why insult that? why try to take that away? Why belittle that?
If I am the head of the Atheist club on campus, I would be a bit better with Non condescending posters around campus. I haven’t seen them (I can see people being offended and ripping them down, but you have to expect that), have members discuss their belief in a class participation (if I remember CMAT 101 had a great platform for this) Participate in events in red square and whatnot. Even hold a fundraiser for some charity. You gotta do something to shed the image of people who only wear dark clothing and hate god and may even like satan (I know that makes no sense, but seriously people believe these things. First and foremost, however, this childish chalk war has to stop. If Cru is being involved, that;s not too christlike is it? and if the athiests are the only ones doing it, you are hurting yourselves.
5. December 2011 at 6:01 pm
Thank you. I wish I could copy paste this in chalk in the middle of Red Square.
5. December 2011 at 11:28 pm
I accept royalties in the form of cash, but dining dollars are acceptable.
18. June 2012 at 10:46 pm
Re: Single issue politics. If a caddanite strongly espoused secular government (or church-state separation), I’d consider it a single issue that could persuade me to vote for that caddanite given that such a statement would be very rare in US politics. I have to admit, though, that single issues are far more likely to cause votes against than votes for. Particularly since, even if a caddanite supports an issue that I strongly support, it’s always possible that he or she could espouse some other idea that I couldn’t support so single issue politics probably doesn’t ever exist in pure form. So I’ll gladly rethink & rescind my phrase with few exceptions in the original post. Frankly I included it because I’m averse to saying something never should be the case. Nonetheless, never is probably closer to the truth in this instance.
5. December 2011 at 11:26 pm
No one attacks you, go about your argument that we’re “wrong” in a better way next time. Even if someone did personally attack you, why do you have to offend everyone? This also shouldn’t be an attack on anyone’s education. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but I do think you could have gone about presenting yours in a different, less offensive way. Don’t get me wrong, it certainly sound like you have done your research and have probably read more of the Bible than most Christians have. Maybe you are misinterpreting the underlying message of the scripture. I think at this point, you are skewing whatever you read in the Bible just to prove your point now. You’re only looking for the bad and not giving the other side a chance. Have you been to CRU and actually listened to what they have to say with a completely open mind? How could you believe that everything came form nothing? Only God could create such an amazing world.
6. December 2011 at 12:42 am
I don’t think either side wants to give the other a chance, and here I thought election year was next year, weird.
6. December 2011 at 2:35 am
“No one attacks you, go about your argument that we’re “wrong” in a better way next time.”
- Either you haven’t read Psalm 53 or you’re just a liar. Which is it?
“Even if someone did personally attack you, why do you have to offend everyone?”
- So you agree that parts of the Bible are in fact offensive?
“Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but I do think you could have gone about presenting yours in a different, less offensive way.”
- That does not mean that opinions are equally valid. It’s worth pointing out that you appear more concerned with whether the atheist group’s delivery is ‘offensive’ than if their message is actually true.
“Don’t get me wrong, it certainly sound like you have done your research and have probably read more of the Bible than most Christians have.”
- More than you have, apparently, or you wouldn’t be whining about how ‘offensive’ it is to point out that the evil and immoral parts of the Bible are in fact evil and immoral.
“Maybe you are misinterpreting the underlying message of the scripture.”
- Unless you’re going to point out specifically how that’s happening, then you’re just making shit up so you don’t have to actually put forth a real argument.
“I think at this point, you are skewing whatever you read in the Bible just to prove your point now.”
- Have *you* read the book of Deuteronomy? How about Judges? My first point still applies. If the god of the Bible commands evil and immoral actions then the god of the Bible is not a good source of morality, and people sure shouldn’t be using quotes from it as ZINGs against atheists. Glass houses and all that.
“You’re only looking for the bad and not giving the other side a chance.”
- Seems like you’re conflating “giving the other side a chance” with ‘ignore all the parts of the book you claim is a divinely inspired source of morality where the divine source behaves like a bloodthirsty, misogynistic, petty tyrant.’
“Have you been to CRU and actually listened to what they have to say with a completely open mind?”
- Yes, and they’re still unable to demonstrate the truth of their outlandish claims with anything approaching actual evidence. Don’t keep your mind so open that your brain falls out.
“How could you believe that everything came form nothing? Only God could create such an amazing world.”
- A failure of imagination on your part is not evidence of your divine being of choice. The same argument you just made applies to ANY creation mythos of ANY religion that humans have had throughout history. Can you demonstrate the truth of your claim? If not, why do you expect to be taken seriously?
6. December 2011 at 10:09 pm
The problem is you are just as bad as they are. No question part of the bible sucks. But as a fellow atheist, it is idiotic to right off the entire thing because part of sucks. Its the same shit with Columbus. Sure he sucked. But he was a product of his times, and that doesn’t negate the fact that he was an incredible person. I don’t why other atheists feel the need to criticize the entire bible because some sections that were written over 2000 years ago are offensive to modern day society. Of course there are going to be some sections that don’t make any sense its fucking 2000 years old. Just leave people alone and let them take the positive insights out of the bible, without shoving the more negative aspects in there face. Honestly crazy people are going to hold onto their crazy beliefs regardless of what you retards write in chalk. Just like the CRU doing it hurts there overall cause, being equally retarded is obviously going to hurt ours. There is a reason that no one takes animal rights seriously, and its because the dipshits in PETA have to make the entire movement look like a bunch of screw balls.
6. December 2011 at 12:39 am
Somewhat unrelated, how would the campus respond to quotes from the Quran being written in chalk?
6. December 2011 at 8:01 pm
^ Interesting. Do it. Salisbury should be more tolerant, imho.
I attended CRU during my Salisburian years. Wasn’t impressed when I was told to spread the word of Jesus or my friends would go to hell. Seriously?
Christianity (as I’ve taken it from my church-goings) is all about following that one dude Christ guy who didn’t like for people to be douches to others. Who fed the hungry. Who gave all that he had and praised those who were generous, loving, serious about what being a human means.
Never-the-less – not the issue. Like begets like, very apt for the historically clouded holy book to be used in such dual manners. More than one side to a story? How about the actual beginnings of the Bible, written so long after Christ was crucified?
Take it with a grain of salt, as with being an American what with freedom of speech and press and all, and move on. Shouldn’t there be some studying somewhere in there?
7. December 2011 at 11:49 pm
just to clear something, you claim “how about the actual beginnings of the bible, written so long after Christ was crucified” The New Testament is what you are referring to and every single book in the New Testament was written with in one or two generations after Christ crucifixion. To say this a little more clear the writers of the New Testament books were either eye witness of this time period or they learned their information from eye witness of the time period. You may ask how do i know this. Well there are manuscripts that are copies of the original writings dating back to the first century AD. if you don’t believe me then look it up for your selves. I am all for self investigation.
18. June 2012 at 11:08 pm
to me that this post is going up against a straw man, and that nobdoy in the atheist community is arguing for us to become a single issue voter, with atheism being that single issue.Luckily, for my argument, I am catching up on back episodes of Secular Nation Podcast today, and just listened to , where Eddie Tabash makes EXACTLY that case I’ve heard others make the same argument, but I don’t have a link off hand for them. However, this one seemed to have just fallen in my lap the day after it was said to me that nobdoy seriously wants us as atheists to be single issue voters, and Eddie uses exactly that phrase, thus proving my case that people are arguing for that
6. December 2011 at 7:48 pm
Ok so let me first say that I am a Christian, AME specifically and honestly I don’t see the big deal about it either way. Do I want to see “slaves obey your masters” walking into Henson no, (but I don’t necessarily want to be bombarded with verse after verse when I’m just trying to go to class either). But I do acknowledge that it is in the bible and have even done papers on the role religion played in owning slaves, and I respect the Atheist Society’s right to say what they want to say. I mean that’s what college is for, it’s a melting pot of different “everythings”, plus last time I checked we still had freedom of speech. Quite honestly I think both groups should grow up about it because both groups are allowed to exist on campus, so agree to disagree. I mean its chalk people you played with it when you were three and it made you happy so why is it causing so much anger? I mean as soon as it rains/monsoons in Salisbury everything is washed away so its not like its permananent. I just think its gotten way out of hand.
6. December 2011 at 11:10 pm
Now I’m a pretty mellow atheist, usually seeing the bible verses doesn’t offend me, but swing psalm 53 is very offensive to me and it seems like a direct attack on the club. Cru could have chosen any other verse to get their message of Jesus across, bit they chose that one. Either they didn’t think it would be offensive or they knew and didn’t care. That’s the main issue in this thing for me. As far as the atheist club retaliating with some choice bible verses of their own, hey it’s free speech and it’s in the bible so it’s fair game. I see it as a sort of wake up call to people who forget that there is some messed up stuff in the bible that might offend people by today’s standards. Hopefully this will make cru or any other group chalking on campus think harder about what they are writing and who it might offend because they are not the only voice on campus.
6. December 2011 at 11:26 pm
Both groups sucks. Hardcore Atheists are just as annoying and useless as hardcore christians. I get it, CRU overstepped their boundaries by posting something that any person with half a brain would percieve as an insult to people that don’t believe in Jesus. Atheist society should have taken the high road instead of pointing out christianity’s obvious flaws. Makes them seem a lot more credible. However, they fell into the trap that atheists often fall into. A christian makes a provocative statement, an atheist responds with vigor and arguments. The catch is that you come off as an a**hole when you do that. Because they have a god, and you don’t. Unfortunately this is the public perception of atheists (and more annoyingly to myself, agnostics, since they both start with “A” you see). So atheists, you want to change the world? Stop being hostile, become accepting, and change the perspective of atheists from annoying pessimists to open minded people.
So yeah, I dislike both groups. Strongly. In fact, we in the Agnostic Society (currently a party of one, myself), believe that you both need to get over yourselves. I can’t say disband because of freedom of speech and all, but you two are the least open minded groups on campus, but you are both parading around saying you are the MOST open minded.
Also atheists. Your primary argument seems to be that there is no god. That’s about as stupid a statement as there is a god. They can’t prove it, you can’t prove it. I am content with saying, I don’t believe there is a god, but I am open to the possibility of there being one.
So long story short, both of you shut up and go away.
7. December 2011 at 1:49 am
Your closing statements regarding their primary argument pretty much destroyed everything you said prior. It made the agnostic club look pretty self righteous.
7. December 2011 at 12:56 pm
I wouldn’t say self righteous, I’d just say that we prefer not to take a stance, hence declaring ourselves agnostic and not atheist or religious.
If you don’t like my closing statements, I’m not forcing you to agree, just stating what was on my mind at the time. Could have been worded better, but I wrote it as a stream of consciousness.
The main point though was my first paragraph, the last graph was just to make sure that I maintained a balanced perspective, nahmean? I can’t side with one group if I have problems with both!
7. December 2011 at 1:48 pm
saying the beliefs of one group are “stupid” is taking a stance. For agnostic, you sure side with the christians. Your only critique is that hardcore christians are annoying. In fact calling athiests “stupid” is what ignited this childish chalk war in the first place. Instead of “stupid” I believe it was a quote along the lines of “fools”. To be undecided, you sure don’t sound like it.
7. December 2011 at 3:28 pm
I can see why you think I’m siding with the christians, but I can assure you I am not. I simply think that although the approach the atheists took was definitely stooping down to the level of religion (which I believe is dying by the by), they covered a few of the good bases against christianity already. But fair enough. I disagree with most organized religions. More people have been killed in the name of god than any other reason in human history. Religion to me is a set of rules firstly, but also a great way to attack people but feel good about yourself. “Love thy neighbor…unless he’s gay or believes in a different invisible man”
Can I be excused now, or do I have to clarify further?
7. December 2011 at 5:02 pm
I really don’t care who you side with, I’m just stating you blatantly insulted the beliefs of atheists. Just because it is an opinion that differs from yours, gives you no right to call it stupid. Trust me, I am very aware of the deplorable acts religion has led to in the history of mankind, the squashing of knowledge, etc. That is not the discussion at hand. and for someone who discusses how the perception of athiests is negative, you really don’t represent your club as very friendly either, just judgmental and condescending.
8. December 2011 at 11:00 am
James, the “club” thing was a joke. Not meant to be taken literally. Hey, if you are an atheist (assuming you are from your tone), I’m all for it! I’m more on your side than anyone elses! That being said, I am not calling your beliefs stupid. What I am saying is that atheists should not play the game that christians and whatnot do because it isn’t even working for them. By stooping down to the level of CRU, the atheist society actually looks worse, because they don’t have a god. Unfortunately society views people who don’t have a god as cruel and insensitive heathans. It sucks. Hell, my own family and some of my close friends have serious problems with me not being religious. Not fun. So I apologize if I offended you by saying atheists are stupid for saying there is absolutely no god. My point IS that atheists should seek to separate themselves from the way christians do things. Atheists need to pose themselves as free thinkers and open mindedness. However, when you sling mud back at them (even if it’s hilariously true stuff) and declare that there is no god with as much vigor as they declare there is one, they will lose every time. Religion has been playing that game for thousands of years, and they’ve crushed opposition through that game before. It’s always gonna be rigged in their favor.
Atheist guys. We need to stop being cynics and curmudgeons and show these people that atheists aren’t out to destroy families and whatnot.
8. December 2011 at 11:02 am
Whoops, typo. In this sentance “…and declare that there is no god with as much vigor as they declare there is one, they will lose every time.” I meant they = atheist society will lose every time.
7. December 2011 at 9:00 pm
I couldn’t read this article without laughing. Having taken Human Geography at WorWic I learned atheism to be the ABSENCE OF BELIEF in terms of religion, a religion being constituted by rituals and a deity and several other factors. If you’re interested in where I’m getting this the book is Human Geography: People, Place, and Culture by Fouberg and others. But back to the reason I laughed, there must be at least 3 times in this article the atheists “beliefs” are referenced, and going by the definition, it is such an oxymoron. Aside from that, the way I see it, basically the CRU members wrote, in the dumbest of terms, “people who don’t believe in God are going to Hell,” and so I wonder why that would offend a person who believes God is fictional. It would be like someone coming up to any rational person and saying, “you should be chained up in the Dark Forest,” or, “you will never have Jacob or Edward for all eternity,” or even, “you’re going to be plunged into the fires of Mount Doom for who you are!” You could be a jerk and get the cops involved, say you were threatened with fire…or you could laugh knowing that’s not possible…which is exactly what the atheists should have done.
8. December 2011 at 2:34 pm
you must not have read my first post. I’m all good, as long as belief’s aren’t being called stupid.
9. December 2011 at 9:12 am
Deal. They aren’t stupid. *Shakes hand*. See A.S. / CRU? We can all just get along if we discuss instead of sniping at each other!