Atheist Billboard taken down

8,941 Views | 119 Replies | Last: 7 yr ago by kurt vonnegut
Guadaloop474
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Atheist Billboard taken down
LondonOllie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I 100% agree with the billboard, but obviously others see it as a threat. Alternative views obviously not welcome by some.
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Could someone please remind me how it's Christians who are persecuted in this country?
boboguitar
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Guadaloop474 said:

Atheist Billboard taken down


Property owners are allowed to control what's on their property. I'm sure they'll just put the sign up elsewhere.
Guadaloop474
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The HHS Mandate on Catholic organizations and private businesses is a direct frontal assault by the US government on our freedom of religion in this country, so yes, here is your reminder...
Sq16Aggie2006
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I think its time to finally figure out what "good" means to a moral relativist
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Guadaloop474 said:

The HHS Mandate on Catholic organizations and private businesses is a direct frontal assault by the US government on our freedom of religion in this country, so yes, here is your reminder...


Good grief. They bent over backwards to accommodate religious beliefs in religious organizations while still providing individual choice. But that still wasn't enough.

Meanwhile, an atheist billboard that is not insulting in any way must be torn down.
Sq16Aggie2006
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Dr. Watson said:

Guadaloop474 said:

The HHS Mandate on Catholic organizations and private businesses is a direct frontal assault by the US government on our freedom of religion in this country, so yes, here is your reminder...


Good grief. They bent over backwards to accommodate religious beliefs in religious organizations while still providing individual choice. But that still wasn't enough.

Meanwhile, an atheist billboard that is not insulting in any way must be torn down.


What about religious beliefs of business owners?
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
As private individuals, they can hold to any belief they want. Their business is not subject to the same laws as their person. If religion is really their primary purpose in business, they should reorganize as a religious nonprofit.
schmendeler
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'd like to know what is up with the username change
schmendeler
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
AstroAg17 said:

What was their old username?


Pretty sure that's bust up (squad 16).
jkag89
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Dr. Watson said:

Guadaloop474 said:

The HHS Mandate on Catholic organizations and private businesses is a direct frontal assault by the US government on our freedom of religion in this country, so yes, here is your reminder...


Good grief. They bent over backwards to accommodate religious beliefs in religious organizations while still providing individual choice. But that still wasn't enough.

Meanwhile, an atheist billboard that is not insulting in any way must be torn down.
Baloney on both. Individual choice would be to opt to work for a religious charity like the Little Sisters of the Poor with the understanding that the order's beliefs prevents them from paying for certain aspects in a health care package that would likely be there if one would opt for different employer.

Nowhere did the article imply that the billboard must be torn down. It seems a few folk voiced displeasure at the message, threatened to boycott and the businesses reacted to the possibility.
jkag89
How long do you want to ignore this user?
schmendeler said:

I'd like to know what is up with the username change
Only conjecture on my part but a thread Bust Up started on the Baseball Other Board might be the cause for a time out.
Dad-O-Lot
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Dr. Watson said:

Guadaloop474 said:

The HHS Mandate on Catholic organizations and private businesses is a direct frontal assault by the US government on our freedom of religion in this country, so yes, here is your reminder...


Good grief. They bent over backwards to accommodate religious beliefs in religious organizations while still providing individual choice. But that still wasn't enough.

Meanwhile, an atheist billboard that is not insulting in any way must be torn down.
BS! They are still fighting to force Nuns to provide contraception to their employees.

Freedom of Religion is supposed to be for individual citizens, not just for religious organizations.

So yes, the HHS Mandate is STILL a direct assault by the US Government on our freedom of religion in this country.

Please tell me where I, a practicing Catholic, can buy a health insurance policy that does not subsidize contraception? I am forced, by law, to subsidize contraception; including abortion-inducing drugs. If I opt out, I am breaking the law.
BusterAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG

Quote:

The billboard was taken down after several residents threatened to stop doing business at the gas station and store, whose space the advertising company used for the signage.
Do you think that these people who did not like the sign did anything wrong?

Do you think that the business owner did anything wrong?

What if your local gas station had a sign that said "Don't wind up in hell with the atheists, come to our church"? Would you think about not doing business there?
Dad-O-Lot
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
There was no government entity forcing the removal of the sign. It was residents complaining and threatening to boycott. A viable usage of free speech and liberty.

It's not like Lamar Advertising was forced to put up a message they disagreed with or risk a lawsuit and the loss of their business.
UTExan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
What a shame. Usually it is the secular/leftist bloc which engages in such censorship.
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Contraception is important for many women beyond just the sexual component. So it's not out of line to have that covered like any other medication (it would be smart to have it covered even if the only thing it did was prevent pregnancy, but that's another discussion). The compromise offered would have completely separated the contraception aspect from the insurance provided by a religious institution. All the organization had to do was fill out a form saying they weren't going to provide contraception. That's it. But oh, the horror.

Here's a more fundamental question: should a religious objection to an action of the state relieve an individual from any obligation towards the state? If you decide your religion forbids paying taxes, should you be allowed to avoid paying taxes? If your religion forbids you from getting a medical license to provide treatment, should you be allowed to avoid getting a license? Where is the line?
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
UTExan said:

What a shame. Usually it is the secular/leftist bloc which engages in such censorship.


No, it isn't. The religious majority in communities is just usually quieter about ostracizing minority positions.
Dad-O-Lot
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Dr. Watson said:

Contraception is important for many women beyond just the sexual component. So it's not out of line to have that covered like any other medication (it would be smart to have it covered even if the only thing it did was prevent pregnancy, but that's another discussion).
and when prescribed for medical reasons unrelated to contraception, Catholic organizations have no problem supporting it; and even Catholic Religious organizations currently exempted still support this when prescribed to correct a medical problem.

Fertility is not a medical "problem". Fertility is an indication that everything is working correctly.
Sq16Aggie2006
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Dr. Watson said:

As private individuals, they can hold to any belief they want. Their business is not subject to the same laws as their person. If religion is really their primary purpose in business, they should reorganize as a religious nonprofit.


What if religious clergy owns a business?
Dad-O-Lot
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Dr. Watson said:

The compromise offered would have completely separated the contraception aspect from the insurance provided by a religious institution. All the organization had to do was fill out a form saying they weren't going to provide contraception. That's it. But oh, the horror.
That is cooperation. There should be NO ACTION required by the organization. NONE!

I should not have to tell anyone that I am Catholic and therefore shouldn't have to do _____.

I should just be able to live my life, make my decisions and not have to justify them to anyone.

There is no compelling reason for the state to require anyone to help anyone else get contraception.
Frok
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Dr. Watson said:

UTExan said:

What a shame. Usually it is the secular/leftist bloc which engages in such censorship.


No, it isn't. The religious majority in communities is just usually quieter about ostracizing minority positions.


It's funny how people just switch sides when things flip flop.

It's a billboard, who cares?

(Clarification - Not accusing you of flip-flopping, I have no idea what you've done in the past. Just stating that in general our points of view cause us to contradict ourselves. Human nature)
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sq16Aggie2006 said:

Dr. Watson said:

As private individuals, they can hold to any belief they want. Their business is not subject to the same laws as their person. If religion is really their primary purpose in business, they should reorganize as a religious nonprofit.


What if religious clergy owns a business?


If the business is for-profit, they have to abide by the law.
Sq16Aggie2006
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Dr. Watson said:

Sq16Aggie2006 said:

Dr. Watson said:

As private individuals, they can hold to any belief they want. Their business is not subject to the same laws as their person. If religion is really their primary purpose in business, they should reorganize as a religious nonprofit.


What if religious clergy owns a business?


If the business is for-profit, they have to abide by the law.
Ah, unless the law is on the "wrong side of history"? Then it's a bull**** law right?
Dad-O-Lot
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Dr. Watson said:

Sq16Aggie2006 said:

Dr. Watson said:

As private individuals, they can hold to any belief they want. Their business is not subject to the same laws as their person. If religion is really their primary purpose in business, they should reorganize as a religious nonprofit.


What if religious clergy owns a business?


If the business is for-profit, they have to abide by the law.
This is the biggest BS response!

This is the exact problem!

Laws being passed which require people violate their deeply-held religious beliefs. You really think a business owner should just say, "oh well, they passed a law, now I need to make a choice; either violate my religious beliefs, or shut down my business".

No, that's crap!
schmendeler
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'd think that if the employees were good catholics, then it doesn't matter that the business offers contraceptives. if there are no takers, then it's moot. if there are non-catholics who work for them, then it shouldn't be any business of the business what they use their medical benefits for. or no?
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sq16Aggie2006 said:

Dr. Watson said:

Sq16Aggie2006 said:

Dr. Watson said:

As private individuals, they can hold to any belief they want. Their business is not subject to the same laws as their person. If religion is really their primary purpose in business, they should reorganize as a religious nonprofit.


What if religious clergy owns a business?


If the business is for-profit, they have to abide by the law.
Ah, unless the law is on the "wrong side of history"? Then it's a bull**** law right?


Where are you getting that from? If a business owner violates the law and is caught, their business will be punished.
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Dad-O-Lot said:

Dr. Watson said:

Sq16Aggie2006 said:

Dr. Watson said:

As private individuals, they can hold to any belief they want. Their business is not subject to the same laws as their person. If religion is really their primary purpose in business, they should reorganize as a religious nonprofit.


What if religious clergy owns a business?


If the business is for-profit, they have to abide by the law.
This is the biggest BS response!

This is the exact problem!

Laws being passed which require people violate their deeply-held religious beliefs. You really think a business owner should just say, "oh well, they passed a law, now I need to make a choice; either violate my religious beliefs, or shut down my business".

No, that's crap!


What if a business owner "deeply-holds" that any and all taxes and safety regulations are a violation of their religious beliefs? Should they be allowed to avoid paying taxes or follow OSHA regulations?
Sq16Aggie2006
How long do you want to ignore this user?
schmendeler said:

I'd think that if the employees were good catholics, then it doesn't matter that the business offers contraceptives. if there are no takers, then it's moot. if there are non-catholics who work for them, then it shouldn't be any business of the business what they use their medical benefits for. or no?
Kind of hard to only hire orthodox Catholics due to that pesky Civil Rights Act which established protected classes. You're mistaking two different issues; 1 having religious clergy forced to offer their employees abortifacients and contraception through their insurance package; 2 those employees being able to go to the store and buy a pack of rubbers. 1 is certainly the business of the company owner; 2 certainly isn't.
Sq16Aggie2006
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Dr. Watson said:

Sq16Aggie2006 said:

Dr. Watson said:

Sq16Aggie2006 said:

Dr. Watson said:

As private individuals, they can hold to any belief they want. Their business is not subject to the same laws as their person. If religion is really their primary purpose in business, they should reorganize as a religious nonprofit.


What if religious clergy owns a business?


If the business is for-profit, they have to abide by the law.
Ah, unless the law is on the "wrong side of history"? Then it's a bull**** law right?


Where are you getting that from? If a business owner violates the law and is caught, their business will be punished.
This is your most annoying shell, the "the law states" shell. We're not here to debate verbiage of laws on the books; that's a very short discussion. Imagine two years ago having a debate about gay marriage, with our side just repeating the verbiage of DOMA, it's childish.
Dad-O-Lot
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Dr. Watson said:

Dad-O-Lot said:

Dr. Watson said:

Sq16Aggie2006 said:

Dr. Watson said:

As private individuals, they can hold to any belief they want. Their business is not subject to the same laws as their person. If religion is really their primary purpose in business, they should reorganize as a religious nonprofit.


What if religious clergy owns a business?


If the business is for-profit, they have to abide by the law.
This is the biggest BS response!

This is the exact problem!

Laws being passed which require people violate their deeply-held religious beliefs. You really think a business owner should just say, "oh well, they passed a law, now I need to make a choice; either violate my religious beliefs, or shut down my business".

No, that's crap!


What if a business owner "deeply-holds" that any and all taxes and safety regulations are a violation of their religious beliefs? Should they be allowed to avoid paying taxes or follow OSHA regulations?
Read the "Religious Freedom Restoration Act". There is already a two-step process for addressing this.

Quote:

Quote:

Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 - Prohibits any agency, department, or official of the United States or any State (the government) from substantially burdening a person's exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, except that the government may burden a person's exercise of religion only if it demonstrates that application of the burden to the person: (1) furthers a compelling governmental interest; and (2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.

What is the compelling government interest?
Is there a less restrictive means of furthering that compelling government interest?

If there are ANY exceptions made that do not require any action by the business owner or excepted entity, then why could that exception not be made to others?

RFRA
boboguitar
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I still haven't figured out what the issue is with this thread.

The government didn't force anything and nothing illegal happened.

As long as there was no breach of contract, I'm not seeing the issue here.
Capitalism
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I fully support the billboard owner exercising their freedom and taking down whatever advertisement they want. I hope one day we all have this freedom.unfortunately I fear an atheist billboard owner would run afoul of the law if they removed a Christian billboard for being Religious. I hope one day The freedom of association will be valued for all of us rather than having some rights to freely associate or not associate elevated above others.
Last Page
Page 1 of 4
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.