jord
Member
+2,382|7121|The North, beyond the wall.

[TUF]Catbox wrote:

atheists should be allowed to advertise their unhappiness and bitterness...  the driver should just ignore it...
You can be very happy safe in the knowledge that there probably is no Haven, hell or God. It's easy if you open your mind
Aries_37
arrivederci frog
+368|7018|London

JoshP wrote:

Aries_37 wrote:

JoshP wrote:

can i be the priest who gets to rape jihad?

@ Aries they're completely different.
they're really not...

the first one is insulting to anyone who believes in a 'god(s)'. It's saying that if you believe in a god you are not enjoying life and it's making you worry. It also insinuates that you have been wrong all this time and that whatever you are trying to do is pointless and you've been wasting your time.

the second one is insulting to anyone who is gay, or sympathises with gay rights. It suggests that being gay is wrong and that some supreme being will make you suffer for it after you die.

Both are insulting and do not need to be put on the side of buses.
exxageration much?
not really, why don't you highlight the exaggeration?

@Uzique yes that's your opinion, but they wouldn't let you plaster it on a public bus.

@jord if I insulted your mother you'd probs take it as a joke. If I then removed all traces of satire from it, put the insult on the side of a bus and told you to drive it around would you?

Last edited by Aries_37 (2009-01-19 11:29:51)

Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6914

[TUF]Catbox wrote:

atheists should be allowed to advertise their unhappiness and bitterness...  the driver should just ignore it...
How does that sign imply unhappiness or bitterness in any way, shape or form?

It promotes the complete opposite.

But you're right, I'm totally bitter about the fact that my religion doesn't impose an inherent guilt, shame or responsibility on my part for the death of some random Jewish fuckjob that didn't even have the convictions to be properly Jewish 2000 years ago. I'm utterly unhappy about the fact that a slimy 55 year old man wearing a white-collar didn't molest me throughout my childhood years. And I am especially gutted over the lack of sexual, social and moral imprisonment that I have suffered throughout my life.

Life really sucks without organised religion telling you they're right and that you should bend your entire life and worldview to suit their profit-driven ideals.

@ Aries, everything is an opinion. All advertising is an opinion. Duh. "We think our product is great and you should buy it". "73% of women asked said [in their opinion] that our vaginal thrush cream worked wonders for their sex life". Just because it's an opinion it doesn't mean it should be perma-banned and with-held.

Last edited by Uzique (2009-01-19 11:34:19)

libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
jord
Member
+2,382|7121|The North, beyond the wall.

Aries_37 wrote:

JoshP wrote:

Aries_37 wrote:


they're really not...

the first one is insulting to anyone who believes in a 'god(s)'. It's saying that if you believe in a god you are not enjoying life and it's making you worry. It also insinuates that you have been wrong all this time and that whatever you are trying to do is pointless and you've been wasting your time.

the second one is insulting to anyone who is gay, or sympathises with gay rights. It suggests that being gay is wrong and that some supreme being will make you suffer for it after you die.

Both are insulting and do not need to be put on the side of buses.
exxageration much?
not really, why don't you highlight the exaggeration?

@Uzique yes that's your opinion, but they wouldn't let you plaster it on a public bus.

@jord if I insulted your mother you'd probs take it as a joke. If I then removed all traces of satire from it, put the insult on the side of a bus and told you to drive it around would you?
How is you personally insulting my mother and making it into a sign anywhere remotely the same as a sign doing something very similar to what other religions have done for the last 500 years and even extended a courtesy that none of the religions do of putting in "Probably"?

Longest sentence ever.
krazed
Admiral of the Bathtub
+619|7223|Great Brown North

[TUF]Catbox wrote:

atheists should be allowed to advertise their unhappiness and bitterness...  the driver should just ignore it...
Catbox
forgiveness
+505|7159

Uzique wrote:

[TUF]Catbox wrote:

atheists should be allowed to advertise their unhappiness and bitterness...  the driver should just ignore it...
How does that sign imply unhappiness or bitterness in any way, shape or form?

It promotes the complete opposite.

But you're right, I'm totally bitter about the fact that my religion doesn't impose an inherent guilt, shame or responsibility on my part for the death of some random Jewish fuckjob that didn't even have the convictions to be properly Jewish 2000 years ago. I'm utterly unhappy about the fact that a slimy 55 year old man wearing a white-collar didn't molest me throughout my childhood years. And I am especially gutted over the lack of sexual, social and moral imprisonment that I have suffered throughout my life.

Life really sucks without organised religion telling you they're right and that you should bend your entire life and worldview to suit their profit-driven ideals.

@ Aries, everything is an opinion. All advertising is an opinion. Duh. "We think our product is great and you should buy it". "73% of women asked said [in their opinion] that our vaginal thrush cream worked wonders for their sex life". Just because it's an opinion it doesn't mean it should be perma-banned and with-held.
you sound upset... that wasn't my goal... i agree that the ad should be on the bus...
Love is the answer
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6914

[TUF]Catbox wrote:

Uzique wrote:

[TUF]Catbox wrote:

atheists should be allowed to advertise their unhappiness and bitterness...  the driver should just ignore it...
How does that sign imply unhappiness or bitterness in any way, shape or form?

It promotes the complete opposite.

But you're right, I'm totally bitter about the fact that my religion doesn't impose an inherent guilt, shame or responsibility on my part for the death of some random Jewish fuckjob that didn't even have the convictions to be properly Jewish 2000 years ago. I'm utterly unhappy about the fact that a slimy 55 year old man wearing a white-collar didn't molest me throughout my childhood years. And I am especially gutted over the lack of sexual, social and moral imprisonment that I have suffered throughout my life.

Life really sucks without organised religion telling you they're right and that you should bend your entire life and worldview to suit their profit-driven ideals.

@ Aries, everything is an opinion. All advertising is an opinion. Duh. "We think our product is great and you should buy it". "73% of women asked said [in their opinion] that our vaginal thrush cream worked wonders for their sex life". Just because it's an opinion it doesn't mean it should be perma-banned and with-held.
you sound upset... that wasn't my goal... i agree that the ad should be on the bus...
I'm not personally or emotionally upset at all, I just thought your comment and generalisation was fucking ridiculously stupid. Atheists are not inherently unhappy people- not having a blind faith or an invisible man in the sky to fellate every night before bedtime isn't the end of the world. Life doesn't become a black hole of depression and terrible uncertainty just because you refuse to drop a few dollars in the local Church's donation box every Sunday. Keep telling yourself that though; perhaps fooling yourself into believing that all non-believers are amoral and unhappy people will help keep you immersed in the delusion.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
JoshP
Banned
+176|6132|Notts, UK

jord wrote:

How is you personally insulting my mother and making it into a sign anywhere remotely the same as a sign doing something very similar to what other religions have done for the last 500 years and even extended a courtesy that none of the religions do of putting in "Probably"?

Longest sentence ever.
LISTEN TO THIS MOTHERFUCKING MAN

lolirony
Aries_37
arrivederci frog
+368|7018|London

jord wrote:

Aries_37 wrote:

JoshP wrote:

exxageration much?
not really, why don't you highlight the exaggeration?

@Uzique yes that's your opinion, but they wouldn't let you plaster it on a public bus.

@jord if I insulted your mother you'd probs take it as a joke. If I then removed all traces of satire from it, put the insult on the side of a bus and told you to drive it around would you?
How is you personally insulting my mother and making it into a sign anywhere remotely the same as a sign doing something very similar to what other religions have done for the last 500 years and even extended a courtesy that none of the religions do of putting in "Probably"?

Longest sentence ever.
My point is that it's an insult on the side of a bus. The people who find it insulting aren't going to be any less insulted by it just because you feel they have wronged you in some way by advertising their religion to you. Just like it's not right for Americans to slate Islam because some people crashed a plane into the towers in the name of Allah (now that was an exaggeration and oversimplification at the same time but it gets my point across). The word 'probably' is not included as a courtesy, it's to make it (tentatively) legal. Freedom of expression is only allowed up until it infriges someone elses rights (i.e. being safe from having your beliefs publicly questioned/attacked).

@Uzique, the key word wasn't 'opinion', it was 'your'. i.e your opinion (I'm not gonna copy paste it) would be found offensive by some and they wouldn't let you pin it to some public transportation...unless of course you added the word 'probably' in it somewhere

And regardless of the moral questionability of the ad's existence, the poor driver should definitely be allowed to refuse to drive it.

Last edited by Aries_37 (2009-01-19 11:56:00)

DesertFox-
The very model of a modern major general
+796|7128|United States of America

Zimmer wrote:

DesertFox- wrote:

Why is such an ad on a bus in the first place? That seems in a bit of bad taste.
Um.... Yet there are Christian ads all over the place? Nu uh. Doesn't just work one way.
I object to having any sort of religious advertisement whatsoever. It should be something one discovers for themselves, as we all know force-feeding doesn't work for that particular topic.
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6914

DesertFox- wrote:

Zimmer wrote:

DesertFox- wrote:

Why is such an ad on a bus in the first place? That seems in a bit of bad taste.
Um.... Yet there are Christian ads all over the place? Nu uh. Doesn't just work one way.
I object to having any sort of religious advertisement whatsoever. It should be something one discovers for themselves, as we all know force-feeding doesn't work for that particular topic.
Yeah, jeez, as we all know... that doesn't work! Only took Christians a few hundred years to figure out the forced-belief-or-death thing didn't work, eh?
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
JoshP
Banned
+176|6132|Notts, UK

Aries_37 wrote:

My point is that it's an insult on the side of a bus. The people who find it insulting aren't going to be any less insulted by it just because you feel they have wronged you in some way by advertising their religion to you. Just like it's not right for Americans to slate Islam because some people crashed a plane into the towers in the name of Allah (now that was an exaggeration and oversimplification at the same time but it gets my point across). The word 'probably' is not included as a courtesy, it's to make it (tentatively) legal. Freedom of expression is only allowed up until it infriges someone elses rights (i.e. being safe from having your beliefs publicly questioned/attacked).

@Uzique, the key word wasn't 'opinion', it was 'your'. i.e your opinion (I'm not gonna copy paste it) would be found offensive by some and they wouldn't let you pin it to some public transportation...unless of course you added the word 'probably' in it somewhere

And regardless of the moral questionability of the ad's existence, the poor driver should definitely be allowed to refuse to drive it.
"Muslim extremists who bomb buses are probably daft, and should stop worrying about the western world's evils and enjoy their life"

is on a bus. Offensive y/n
DesertFox-
The very model of a modern major general
+796|7128|United States of America

Uzique wrote:

DesertFox- wrote:

Zimmer wrote:


Um.... Yet there are Christian ads all over the place? Nu uh. Doesn't just work one way.
I object to having any sort of religious advertisement whatsoever. It should be something one discovers for themselves, as we all know force-feeding doesn't work for that particular topic.
Yeah, jeez, as we all know... that doesn't work! Only took Christians a few hundred years to figure out the forced-belief-or-death thing didn't work, eh?
Stop insulting all those dead people (and the Southern US---actually you can insult them), they can't argue back!
Aries_37
arrivederci frog
+368|7018|London

JoshP wrote:

Aries_37 wrote:

My point is that it's an insult on the side of a bus. The people who find it insulting aren't going to be any less insulted by it just because you feel they have wronged you in some way by advertising their religion to you. Just like it's not right for Americans to slate Islam because some people crashed a plane into the towers in the name of Allah (now that was an exaggeration and oversimplification at the same time but it gets my point across). The word 'probably' is not included as a courtesy, it's to make it (tentatively) legal. Freedom of expression is only allowed up until it infriges someone elses rights (i.e. being safe from having your beliefs publicly questioned/attacked).

@Uzique, the key word wasn't 'opinion', it was 'your'. i.e your opinion (I'm not gonna copy paste it) would be found offensive by some and they wouldn't let you pin it to some public transportation...unless of course you added the word 'probably' in it somewhere

And regardless of the moral questionability of the ad's existence, the poor driver should definitely be allowed to refuse to drive it.
"Muslim extremists who bomb buses are probably daft, and should stop worrying about the western world's evils and enjoy their life"

is on a bus. Offensive y/n
Muslim extremists would find it offensive yes. And if they're not the ones reading it then what is the point of the ad? to make people not want to be extremist suicide bombers? whatever, i'm not going down this route, whether that is morally acceptable is another topic altogether due to public perception of extremists who kill people and whether human rights apply to them. If you were trying to make some sort of comparison between them and people who believe in god though, all I'll say is no..... religious people do still have rights

Last edited by Aries_37 (2009-01-19 12:11:50)

JoshP
Banned
+176|6132|Notts, UK

Aries_37 wrote:

JoshP wrote:

Aries_37 wrote:

My point is that it's an insult on the side of a bus. The people who find it insulting aren't going to be any less insulted by it just because you feel they have wronged you in some way by advertising their religion to you. Just like it's not right for Americans to slate Islam because some people crashed a plane into the towers in the name of Allah (now that was an exaggeration and oversimplification at the same time but it gets my point across). The word 'probably' is not included as a courtesy, it's to make it (tentatively) legal. Freedom of expression is only allowed up until it infriges someone elses rights (i.e. being safe from having your beliefs publicly questioned/attacked).

@Uzique, the key word wasn't 'opinion', it was 'your'. i.e your opinion (I'm not gonna copy paste it) would be found offensive by some and they wouldn't let you pin it to some public transportation...unless of course you added the word 'probably' in it somewhere

And regardless of the moral questionability of the ad's existence, the poor driver should definitely be allowed to refuse to drive it.
"Muslim extremists who bomb buses are probably daft, and should stop worrying about the western world's evils and enjoy their life"

is on a bus. Offensive y/n
Muslim extremists would find it offensive yes. And if they're not the ones reading it then what is the point of the ad? to make people not want to be extremist suicide bombers? whatever, i'm not going down this route, whether that is morally acceptable is another topic altogether due to public perception of extremists who bomb things and whether human rights apply to them. If you were trying to make some sort of comparison between them and people who believe in god though, all I'll say is yes, religious people do still have rights
"Macs are probably far superior to PC's. Stop worrying about computers breaking and get on and enjoy your life!"

Offensive y/n

This is just the same (if not more toned down) as the Mac vs PC adverts. It's advertising - just for a different product. If it's offensive, who's really that bothered? Nobody gives a shit whether you beleive in macs or not.

And anyway, the advert is hardly going to convert one of, say, us hardcore PC gaming nerds/hardcore Christians. It's aiming at the people who are unsure

tl;dr i'm an atheist, and i'm a christian!

Last edited by JoshP (2009-01-19 12:16:57)

Aries_37
arrivederci frog
+368|7018|London

JoshP wrote:

Aries_37 wrote:

JoshP wrote:


"Muslim extremists who bomb buses are probably daft, and should stop worrying about the western world's evils and enjoy their life"

is on a bus. Offensive y/n
Muslim extremists would find it offensive yes. And if they're not the ones reading it then what is the point of the ad? to make people not want to be extremist suicide bombers? whatever, i'm not going down this route, whether that is morally acceptable is another topic altogether due to public perception of extremists who bomb things and whether human rights apply to them. If you were trying to make some sort of comparison between them and people who believe in god though, all I'll say is yes, religious people do still have rights
"Macs are probably far superior to PC's. Stop worrying about computers breaking and get on and enjoy your life!"

Offensive y/n

This is just the same (if not more toned down) as the Mac vs PC adverts. It's advertising - just for a different product. If it's offensive, who's really that bothered? Nobody gives a shit whether you beleive in macs or not.

And anyway, the advert is hardly going to convert one of, say, us hardcore PC gaming nerds/hardcore Christians. It's aiming at the people who are unsure

tl;dr i'm an atheist, and i'm a christian!
Right I agree with what you're saying about noone truly giving a shit about ads and that not everyone is stupid enough to be influenced by them...

but again the example doesn't really work. microsoft would have had a shitstorm about those ads with the young, cool looking guy as opposed to the fat bloke in the sweater. If you delivered a truckload of flyers with the ad on it and asked them to distribute it to their shareholders, employees and customers I think they'd refuse tbh

Also commercial products are in a different moral bracket to personal beliefs/lifestyles so they aren't directly comparable (inb4 someone says religions are commercial entities )
JoshP
Banned
+176|6132|Notts, UK

Aries_37 wrote:

(inb4 someone says religions are commercial entities )
scientology tbh

Aries_37 wrote:

microsoft would have had a shitstorm about those ads with the young, cool looking guy as opposed to the fat bloke in the sweater.
links or it didn't happen, i don't really remember any sort of MS shitstorm about apple's ads

Aries_37 wrote:

If you delivered a truckload of flyers with the ad on it and asked them to distribute it to their shareholders, employees and customers I think they'd refuse tbh
the same is true for any company and their direct rival, regardless of the content of the ad... durr
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6914
Organised religions ARE commercial and political entities; even the original temples were centres of commerce and public rule. It doesn't have to be as vulgar and obvious as Scientology to realise that organised religion and the human structures of God-worship only exist to regulate mass-behaviour and cream a profit off it. Has been happening since pre-Christian Roman times.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
JoshP
Banned
+176|6132|Notts, UK

Uzique wrote:

Organised religions ARE commercial and political entities; even the original temples were centres of commerce and public rule. It doesn't have to be as vulgar and obvious as Scientology to realise that organised religion and the human structures of God-worship only exist to regulate mass-behaviour and cream a profit off it. Has been happening since pre-Christian Roman times.
correct

monies to save you from purgatory is pretty much a medieval version of scientology

just it was everywhere unlike scientology
Bell
Frosties > Cornflakes
+362|6992|UK

Fucking capitalist christians
Aries_37
arrivederci frog
+368|7018|London

Uzique wrote:

Organised religions ARE commercial and political entities; even the original temples were centres of commerce and public rule. It doesn't have to be as vulgar and obvious as Scientology to realise that organised religion and the human structures of God-worship only exist to regulate mass-behaviour and cream a profit off it. Has been happening since pre-Christian Roman times.
Well you're definitely right in a lot of cases, but all religious individuals will believe that they are the exception. My 'inb4' was just to hopefully preempt it as it was irrelevant to what I was saying.

@josh no links but as you say they are a business under the bounds of marketing laws. The shitstorm is presumed. Morals won't and shouldn't stop mac/microsoft from slandering the shit out of each other. But imagine the outrage if chirstianity suddenly released a 'Islam is probably false, they should stop praying and enjoy a variety of meat' ad...you just can't compare the concept of religions to businesses. It's morally unacceptable and we live in a society based on morals.

Last edited by Aries_37 (2009-01-19 13:12:17)

JoshP
Banned
+176|6132|Notts, UK

Aries_37 wrote:

@josh no links but as you say they are a business under the bounds of marketing laws. Morals won't and shouldn't stop mac/microsoft from slandering the shit out of each other.
THIS IS EXACTLY THE SAME AS RELIGION

THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE

/cruisecontrol

you have just as much right to complain about being offended by pro-mac adverts as pro-atheist adverts: fuck all.
Aries_37
arrivederci frog
+368|7018|London

JoshP wrote:

Aries_37 wrote:

@josh no links but as you say they are a business under the bounds of marketing laws. Morals won't and shouldn't stop mac/microsoft from slandering the shit out of each other.
THIS IS EXACTLY THE SAME AS RELIGION

THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE

/cruisecontrol

you have just as much right to complain about being offended by pro-mac adverts as pro-atheist adverts: fuck all.
right well this debate is becoming a bit too circular for my tastes so i'm gonna go watch the uzique-vilham shit unfold in the other thread for a bit.
JoshP
Banned
+176|6132|Notts, UK

Aries_37 wrote:

JoshP wrote:

Aries_37 wrote:

@josh no links but as you say they are a business under the bounds of marketing laws. Morals won't and shouldn't stop mac/microsoft from slandering the shit out of each other.
THIS IS EXACTLY THE SAME AS RELIGION

THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE

/cruisecontrol

you have just as much right to complain about being offended by pro-mac adverts as pro-atheist adverts: fuck all.
right well this debate is becoming a bit too circular for my tastes so i'm gonna go watch the uzique-vilham shit unfold in the other thread for a bit.
k

email your reply back asap
Doctor Strangelove
Real Battlefield Veterinarian.
+1,758|6911

Dauntless wrote:

DoctaStrangelove wrote:

Freezer7Pro wrote:


Why not?
Because it would be a complete and total waste of money. I mean, if Christians or Muslims did it then they would think that by converting them they save their soles, and thus it would, by their belief, be good for both of them. If atheists do it then, well they don't belief in anything anyway so converting people doesn't mean shit to them, unless they're dicks.
What do you care? It wasn't your money they spent, Richard Dawkins put it there I think (who is great btw), and just because they aren't saving their soles doesn't mean they can't save people from wasting their time and believing outdated fairytales.
I don't care, I'm just saying, it seems like a waste of money to me.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard