The Raving Theist

Dedicated to Jesus Christ, Now and Forever

Me Too

September 23, 2006 | 28 Comments

A guest blogger at The Dawn Patrol discusses the ACLU’s abandonment of its challenge to Ohio’s “Choose Life” license plate program. Among the points he makes is that in no state has the pro-choice side ever initiated a license plate drive to spread its message. Rather, proposals for such plates have always come as afterthoughts to pro-life initiatives, usually as part of a strategy to shut the plate program down altogether.

There’s a similar pattern in the atheist/theist controversphere. Atheists generally don’t erect seasonal displays promoting their metaphysics affirmatively. Instead, they wait until a religious display goes up, and then demand to insert a godless symbol or slogan in the hopes that the proposal will be so unpalatable that the project will be abandoned.

Just pointing this out.

Comments

28 Responses to “Me Too”

  1. The Unbrainwashed
    September 23rd, 2006 @ 7:40 pm

    I hate to break the bead news to you RA, but the readership of your blog has greatly decreased. Before your “conversion”, I didn’t even realize there was a forum on your site because I was so intrigued to see what thought-provoking, yet incredibly condescending and biting post you would have next. Unfortunately, now I rarely notice your new entries and rather come to the site only to post in the forum.

    For the past three months, the title of your blog does not apply in the least and I’m still wondering if you’ve “heard the good news.” Too bad you’re no longer the Raving Atheist”.

  2. Kafkaesquí
    September 23rd, 2006 @ 9:51 pm

    And it’s amazing how the US didn’t enter WWII until *after* we were attacked by the Japanese.

    Just pointing this out, as well.

  3. Kamikaze189
    September 23rd, 2006 @ 10:51 pm

    Unbrainwashed, you’re right.

    The topic of RA’s possible theism has been discussed a lot, so I don’t really want to get into that again. But I did interview him at one point in the chat room where he said he would not comment on whether or not he believed in god.

  4. Marcus
    September 23rd, 2006 @ 10:55 pm

    I took a legal activism class with John Banzhaf, where he discussed this generally as a potential type of legal leverage (along with his others, such as “legal judo” and “guerilla law”), which lead me to comment that this was particularly common in church/state cases.

  5. i like RA's cock
    September 24th, 2006 @ 2:22 am

    As it is now, the United States is a pro-choice country. Hence, pro-lifers want change, which gives them a reason to advertise. Why does a group of people (the pro-choice side) need to “spread the message” when its position is already accepted at the law of the land?

    Christians feel better when other people share in their beliefs, as they will never have the company of a logical argument. So what do they do? They represent their savior as a muddy piece of plastic in their front yard a couple months a year. As RA has so brilliantly noted (in what must have been a stroke of luck) in the past, atheism is not religion, but rather its rejection. I believe the absence of any seasonal decor usually displayed by a theist is therefore perfectly appropriate “advertising” by the atheist.

    they wait until a religious display goes up, and then demand to insert a godless symbol or slogan in the hopes that the proposal will be so unpalatable that the project will be abandoned

    Because as you well know RA, the law gives them that right, but they would undoubtably be happier if the project had never been proposed in the first place.

  6. i like RA's cock
    September 24th, 2006 @ 2:22 am

    As it is now, the United States is a pro-choice country. Hence, pro-lifers want change, which gives them a reason to advertise. Why does a group of people (the pro-choice side) need to “spread the message” when its position is already accepted at the law of the land?

    Christians feel better when other people share in their beliefs, as they will never have the company of a logical argument. So what do they do? They represent their savior as a muddy piece of plastic in their front yard a couple months a year. As RA has so brilliantly noted (in what must have been a stroke of luck) in the past, atheism is not religion, but rather its rejection. I believe the absence of any seasonal decor usually displayed by a theist is therefore perfectly appropriate “advertising” by the atheist.

    they wait until a religious display goes up, and then demand to insert a godless symbol or slogan in the hopes that the proposal will be so unpalatable that the project will be abandoned

    Because as you well know RA, the law gives them that right, but they would undoubtably be happier if the project had never been proposed in the first place.

  7. i like RA's cock
    September 24th, 2006 @ 2:22 am

    As it is now, the United States is a pro-choice country. Hence, pro-lifers want change, which gives them a reason to advertise. Why does a group of people (the pro-choice side) need to “spread the message” when its position is already accepted at the law of the land?

    Christians feel better when other people share in their beliefs, as they will never have the company of a logical argument. So what do they do? They represent their savior as a muddy piece of plastic in their front yard a couple months a year. As RA has so brilliantly noted (in what must have been a stroke of luck) in the past, atheism is not religion, but rather its rejection. I believe the absence of any seasonal decor usually displayed by a theist is therefore perfectly appropriate “advertising” by the atheist.

    they wait until a religious display goes up, and then demand to insert a godless symbol or slogan in the hopes that the proposal will be so unpalatable that the project will be abandoned

    Because as you well know RA, the law gives them that right, but they would undoubtably be happier if the project had never been proposed in the first place.

  8. JUST_ANOTHER_PRIMATE
    September 24th, 2006 @ 7:20 am

    “RA” = Raving Antiabortionist

    Once again RA is wrong, wrong, wrong …

    So he says: “Instead, they wait until a religious display goes up, and then demand to insert a godless symbol or slogan …….. ”

    And how many other cases involve atheists wanting to erect “atheist displays” in retaliation to the pervasive posting of religious symbols throughout the US? I can’t think of any.

    Mt Soledade cross: request removal.
    (nutcase) Roy Moore 10 commandments: request removal.
    Prayer in school: no prayers in school please.
    Pledge of Allegiance: no reference to god please.

    In NONE of these and myriad other cases have atheist request equal time with the addition of their own antireligioius slogans or symbols.

    If those religious artifacts didn’t exist in public display you wouldn’t hear a peep from atheist organizations. Most atheists merely want to be free from the pervasive diplay of religious symbols. period!

  9. Traum
    September 24th, 2006 @ 3:23 pm

    Their attacks on our tactics as opposed to our message fills me with satisfaction.

    Let the mockery of bad taste continue.

  10. Axolotl
    September 24th, 2006 @ 7:00 pm

    RA: Will you please provide examples of some “atheistic displays” promoted by non-believers to counter the theistic ones?

  11. Holopupenko
    September 25th, 2006 @ 1:33 am

    RA:
         Keep going, RA… you’re doing great! There are a lot of atheists out there apparently unable and deathly afraid to challenge their own presuppositions. Funny how so many atheists keep writing “boring” or “yawn” or “your readership is declining”… yet lurking around and repeating these “threats” over and over and over.

  12. Kamikaze189
    September 25th, 2006 @ 6:30 am

    Having your readership dwindle to a couple theists on a (supposedly) atheist blog is a huge accomplishment! Keep up the good work there buddy!

    Boring.
    Yawn.
    Your readership is declining.

  13. Professor Chaos
    September 25th, 2006 @ 11:08 am

    zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

  14. JUST_ANOTHER_PRIMATE
    September 25th, 2006 @ 11:43 am

    Ah yes —- watching the ever so slow sinking of an ark of fools !!!

  15. Holopupenko
    September 25th, 2006 @ 12:02 pm

    Thank you, gentlepersons, for helping to demonstrate the point. You have leave to continue visiting and commenting while prentending not to be interested. This is SOooo interesting to observe. Thank you, as well and again, RA: you’re driving these guys batty and exposing their lack of indepedent thinking is tooooo sweet.

  16. JUST_ANOTHER_PRIMATE
    September 25th, 2006 @ 12:12 pm

    Holohead:

    My rebuttal to Raving Antiabortionist’s post was that he was mistaken in generalizing from ONE news item that atheists in general want to introduce symbols of atheism into government and public display …

    Can you provide any evidence that supports Raving Anitabortionisst’s claims?

    I think not … just like you can’t provide much evidence for many of your superstitious beliefs.

  17. Thorngod
    September 25th, 2006 @ 12:24 pm

    Just Another P, surely you’re not saying that Holopu is not an “independent” thinker!

  18. Kamikaze189
    September 25th, 2006 @ 3:46 pm

    Holo, you have wrongly assumed that I (and probably other atheists) read, or care, what RA now writes. And if we do happen to care, we disagree. Therefore, if anyone is failing to think independently, it’s you.

    In response to your post before: Personally, I have no problem challenging my presuppositions. For example, I once assumed there was a god. I challenged that belief, found that there was absolutely nothing to support it, and dropped it. If ever you find unambigious proof of god, let me know. I’ll be the first person to convert.

  19. Some Guy
    September 25th, 2006 @ 9:48 pm

    I miss the good old days.

  20. Vernichten
    September 26th, 2006 @ 8:26 am

    “A guest blogger at The Dawn Patrol…”

    That’s really all I needed to read. Zzzzzzzzzzz

  21. DamnRight
    September 26th, 2006 @ 10:32 am

    So… atheists must agree on all issues… or you’re not really an atheist… hm… sounds cultish…

  22. Kafkaesquí
    September 26th, 2006 @ 1:51 pm

    Actually DamnRight, atheists only need agree on one issue. When *an* atheist no longer seems to hold to that particular view, it’s rather hard to take them serious in anything else. Sort of a failing we humans have. If you want to call it that.

    Would you expect a Catholic priest to expound on how Jesus is not the son of God without being ridiculed and chased from the pulpit?

  23. JP
    September 26th, 2006 @ 2:13 pm

    Change the name of your fucking blog. You are a Christ puncher pretending to have a brain. WTF happened to you?

  24. spurwing plover
    September 27th, 2006 @ 2:02 pm

    So whats the ACLU have aginst CHOOSE LIFE licsens plates after all this is matter of FREEDOM OF SPEECH something that radicals like PLANNED PARENTHOOD dont beleive in

  25. Cthu
    September 27th, 2006 @ 9:43 pm

    Can you point to specific examples of atheists waiting until a religious display goes up, then demanding that a godless symbol or slogan be inserted in the hopes that the proposal will be so unpalatable that the project will be abandoned?

    Your links show neither. They show a symbol of godlessness, they reference the display of a ‘Winter Solstice’ sign on the behalf of the godless. Neither of these links give evidence of atheists waiting for a religious display to go up, then demanding that a godless symbol or slogan be inserted–in the hopes of anything.

    In fact, the Winter Solstice sign is if anything proof that atheists do erect symbols of their own to promote their metaphysics affirmatively.

    I don’t know what you’re up to or what you’re about these days, but if you’re trying to prove some point you’d do well to be both more direct and more substantive in going about it. Your readership–dwindling or not–be damned. You have an ethical obligation to be up front about things. Don’t let your ego get in the way.

  26. Annie Banno
    September 28th, 2006 @ 8:15 pm

    Can you imagine, RA, the frothing at the mouth and spewing vitriol you’d get if you ever actually DID change the name of your blog? You’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t. Keep up the good work. I love a good mystery. Some here apparently can’t stand it.

    I can only imagine the sturm und drang and godless wrath you’d incur if you ever (gasp!) closed down the forum. Where would the seething crowd go to hear themselves do their independent thinking and potty-mouthing THEN?? Who would they have to trash endlessly, mercilessly? Who would read their cuss words then?

    Don’t worry, folks, I’m not savvy as to what RA will or will not do, any more than you are. Just wondering out loud. Some of you really give atheists a bad name, you know, and you don’t care if you do. I’m not being hardassed or sarcastic, I’m dead serious. You don’t do yourselves any favors sometimes…

  27. Cthu
    September 28th, 2006 @ 10:18 pm

    Godless wrath… seething crowd… spewing vitriol…

    Yet many people have asked the very legitimate question: what substantive evidence is there of the claims asserted; namely, that atheists wait until a religious display goes up, then demand that a godless symbol or slogan be inserted in the hopes that the proposal will be made so unpalatable that the project will be abandoned?

    This is the claim that has been made, and all the more rational and reserved among us are asking for is substantiation of that claim. The links provided don’t offer any such substantiation–not even close.

    Inflammatory rhetoric, whether of the critical or cheerleader variety, does nothing but obscure the issues that have been raised.

  28. Cthu
    October 1st, 2006 @ 9:46 pm

    This is a last call for intellectual honesty. ‘Just pointing this out’, but you made a claim–that atheists generally “don’t erect seasonal displays promoting their metaphysics affirmatively. Instead, they wait until a religious display goes up, and then demand to insert a godless symbol or slogan in the hopes that the proposal will be so unpalatable that the project will be abandoned.”

    You have failed to support this claim.

    You’ve made a baseless assertion and continue to evade calls to support the claim. Here’s yet another call to support the claim.

    Are you intellectually honest? Do you have a concept of intellectual integrity? If so, you must realize that what you have stated here cries out for evidential support. Either support it or admit you mispoke. You’re not a god, you’re only human. Be an honest and ethical human. Support your claim or admit you mispoke.

  • Basic Assumptions

    First, there is a God.

    Continue Reading...

  • Search

  • Quote of the Day

    • Fifty Random Links

      See them all on the links page.

      • No Blogroll Links