Yard Display Shows Jesus Killing Santa

Don't be ridiculous.

Atheists are here actually laughing about this guy's display not because we disagree with it, but because he is using humor to express his opinion. Obviously, this guy is upset over the secularization of christmas.

I am an atheist, but I honor this guy's expression of his rejection of my own beliefs. Why? Because he's using humor to do it and is standing up for his beliefs without stepping on mine.

My own actions in opposing the actions of some christians during this season is because they want to force their celebrations into the public sphere where I have to endure their celebrations without a choice. Take your sectarian celebrations back into your church or home where it belongs, and I'll support your right to them as much as I defend my own.

Personally, I think this guy's display is a hoot! I love the way his neighbors are getting bent outta shape over it, because it exposes their intolerance, which I reject no matter who exhibits it.

thank you, rhwa'. actually i thnk it's humorous too, actually too. I'm not responding as much to that as much as to some of the other obvious anti-religious sentiments I find equally ridiculous. carry on.

but I'll add, even you, tend to prove this image =P

"My own actions in opposing the actions of some christians during this season is because they want to force their celebrations into the public sphere where I have to endure their celebrations without a choice."--rwahrena

LMFAO =D...your very words read so undeniably much like the caption itself =D

i thnk you're ARE an atheist, by no god whatsoever! lolz

...and your comments are a typically ignorant christian rant.

I and other atheists are not believers in "nothing". We just don't think that YOUR brand of belief makes any sense.

Personally, I am a humanist. I believe in the inherent worth and goodness of humanity, as opposed to the typical christian teaching that humans are inherently sinful.

There is lots more to it than that, but that is at the bottom of the difference.

If you actually learned something about atheists, you wouldn't sound so ignorant. As it is, you just seem like a typical christian shill. All bluster and no good sense.

HAHAHAHA! LOL! ROFLMAO!

You are going to cite FEW to me? A man in his elderly years, tragically taken advantage of by those too concerned with their own agendas to bother to admit that the man they've "converted" was already well into senility?

Don't make me laugh.

And yeah, go ahead, throw out a few insults, those are the proof that your arguments are getting thin, especially since I didn't come here to argue, but you seem intent upon provoking me and any other atheist around.

Like I said, just like a typical theist shill.

I guess you've never heard of a typo, huh? We both know who we were talking about.

You know? You are getting tiresome, and as is typical of your type, you are getting abusively and personally nasty. I have made no such attacks on you, and have merely tried to make my own views known.

Yet you have constantly made nasty little remarks about me, trying to deride my views by deriding me.

I have made no claims to any kind of "higher power", either intellectual or otherwise, yet you choose to use that straw man to put me down.

I think it's time to call a halt to this thread, as it is tiresome to try to have a discussion with someone that is determined to be derisive and nasty. Feel free to claim a "victory" over this atheist, as I refuse to get into a name calling contest with you. If that's your idea of "victory", then you are welcome to it.

Dude, whatever you're smoking is resulting in unintelligible ramblings. Perhaps you should detox before posting. Whatever it is, please keep it to yourself, I don't want any.

I would say that you should go back to school yourself, if only to relearn how to defend a statement.

Your entire defense here has been the Ad Hominem, or to attack me, the challenger, instead of my position. Nice little distraction, to throw Flew into the argument, when he had nothing to do with the initial statement of either one of us. (Which, by the way, is another logical fallacy - Appeal to Authority - as if one man's opinion is any more suggestive of validity than any other.)

The Ad Hominem is useful in verbal debates, when one can distract the audience from one's weaknesses and the opponent's strengths by throwing in all sorts of distracting material, especially the personal attack, which strikes at the opponent's ego, and so is most often successful.

However, a personal attack ONLINE is rarely as successful, because the entire argument is there, online, in the thread, for all to see, so your initial statement, and mine, remain in view. Therefor, you cannot distract from the fact that your subsequent posts bear little or no relationship to any real defense of your initial statement, and your entire line of posts containing personal attacks are exposed as unsuccessful attempts to defend what you apparently believe is indefensible. (or else you would do so instead of lowering yourself into the pit of poor debating tactics.)

Any reader can start from the beginning and view the fact that you have made no real attempt to defend your initial post through any logical process save a logical fallacy.

Of course, all this is dependent upon the assumption that you are a serious poster and really believe what you posted, and are not a troll, who is here merely to ignite argument and mess with people.

So go ahead, keep pounding away on the personal attack, throwing in the distracting points, and using purely logical fallacies as your debating techniques. I'll keep pointing out the failures.

When you decide to truly get around to actually debating the points of your post, I'll be glad to join in.

oh yeah...how remiss of me! happy NEW YEAR!!! =D lol

much better than Xmas right???? =D LOL except that no one gets to pretend to kill anyone else and we have to hope for something better and call it a "resolution" no one will hold you to! lol now there's a holiday worth remembering to yuck it up for!!! =D yuck yuck yuck =D hehe im just kidding...

have a great New Year everyone!!!

Ben Stein starts this interview with the premise that Dawkins should not share his opinion because it would make believers unhappy. What else would expect from a Nixon speechwriter?

probably at least a little better and a lot more than we learn to expect from you, I hope.

Alister McGrath, an Oxford theologian with a PhD in molecular biophysics before turning to theology, makes this dry observation in Dawkin's God:

"Dawkins talking about memes is like believers talking about God--an invisible, unidentifiable postulate, which helps explain some things about experience, but ultimately lies beyond empirical investigation."

McGrath contends that for memes to be taken seriously, we may consider a meme for religious skepticism per se then... "a meme for belief in memes' as it were...so McGrath posits that "The meme concept then dies the slow death of self-referentiality, in that, if taken seriously, the idea explains itself as much anything else." [i.e. Dawkins is quite the self-serving mfer on this subject...see any resemblance between yourselves?? ;) }

It is quite VERY curious to many how "inattentive" Dawkins (and like-minded dufmucks) is to anthropological and sociological theories of the origins of religion. David Aikman writes "If Dawkins's meme theory has any validity at all, then the process by which people come to believe in atheism as the best explanation of the universe must be analogous to his [self-same] theory of religion memes flitting across human culture and infecting people. Dawkins addresses this, but then dismisses it with a remarkable example of special pleading: "Scientific ideas, like all memes, are subject to a kind of natural selection, and this might look superficially virus-like. But the selective forces that scrutinize scientific ideas are not arbitrary or capricious. They are exacting, well-honed rules, and they do not favor pointless, self-serving behavior." Dawkins might as well have also asserted that scientists are quite immune from competitive urges, envy, selfish ambition, and the tendency to squabble with people...[LOL yep...I'll vouch for that w/this mofo] And if you buy that, you might also be interested in buying some oceanfront property in Montana."

I love it. :D

Less likelihood of beer case furniture and a toilet planter in the front yard in NYC

The term "redneck" was used to describe caucasian men of low socioeconomic status who worked all day in the fields and would return home with sunburned necks, hence the term "redneck". However, these days it has become synonymous with anyone who lives in rural areas or votes republican. So technically, if this guy lacks the traditional sunburn on the back of his neck then he is not a redneck.

Echoz, You don't know anything about me and yet you consistently and childishly attack everything I say. #1. I am not a he #2. Your responses are incoherent #3. You are developing a reputation as a troll and a stalker.

This will be my last response to you. Pick on someone else from now on.

good. now f'off and know and think this when you see me in the future. I see any particularly antireligious BS anywhere, I confront the poor bech who makes the mistake, and if it happens to be your self-same stupidity, well... *shrug* consider it freedom of speech and your own dufmbuck serendipity. I take no special interest in you otherwise than that you happen to be in the line of fire, and my enjoyment is purely my own in that event ;) But I can't do much for you about that, except advise you to duck, if your raked skin is so thin, and you don't like the rash my broom gives you.

Giving you credit for you spirit however, I must say...you ARE quite rough on my 'brooms' too. Good thing I have more than one to "pick on" right? ;D hehe

oh LOL.

Is that because you heard Jesus say, "you want some of this too?" ;)

and I hope you like getting it from your "new" santa mfer.

And law enforcement would probably have made him take it down.

LOL!

Yes, I do love that one. :D

that's just amazing.

That's awesome haha

So if their is a city ordinance against this he shouldn't have the right?!?

He should have this right no matter what the mob tells him! This is the fundamental right of freedom, property rights

I was talking about the normal kind of city ordinance against displays that are too big, too close to the street, etc. Any city ordinance that would regulate CONTENT in a way that would stifle free speech is obviously a target for lawsuits!

Do you like this art? Just curious

I do. I like most things controversial. It is also pretty creepy so that gets bonus points. I am also impressed that it got as much publicity as it did. The artist seems a tad bit on the unstable side and he may have created a new career in art by marketing himself by offending the neighbors. I like that kind of ingenuity. I hope he gets a gallery show.

that would be prejudice

I agree. It is free speech and it should stay up serving the additional purpose of displaying to this fool's community that sometimes abortion is not only legal but sometimes justified and necessary.

too bad they didn't catch that in your case eh? ;) lol

But if he sees his shadow, there'll be six more weeks of winter.

But only if he fails to replace the tooth under my pillow tonight with a quarter.

Too many chimney descents will mess you up.

The milk man? The repair guy? The meter reader? :)

ME, that's who.