South Africa Flag logo

South African Skeptics

December 09, 2019, 07:51:55 AM
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
Go to mobile page.
News: Follow saskeptics on twitter.
   
   Skeptic Forum Board Index   Help Forum Rules Search GoogleTagged Login Register Chat Blogroll  
Pages: 1 2 3 [All]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic:

anti-atheist billboard

 (Read 10190 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
benguela
Full Member
***

Skeptical ability: +3/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 223


An infinitesimal subset of the observable universe


benguela
WWW
« on: January 16, 2012, 11:18:50 AM »

ASA makes church remove billboard. Do you agree with the ruling?
Logged
JoanA Arc
Newbie
*

Skeptical ability: +1/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 47


« Reply #1 on: January 16, 2012, 12:33:36 PM »

Before I even clicked on your link (thanks for supplying) my knee-jerk reaction was "hell yeah!" and after reading it through, my comment still stands.  If an atheist or A.N. Other or plain Joe Soap posted a billboard declaring all Xtians were stupid, can you imagine the outcry?
Logged
Benjammin
Newbie
*

Skeptical ability: +2/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 36



« Reply #2 on: January 16, 2012, 12:42:01 PM »

Given the law the ruling is probably in line with it. I disagree with the law and with Mr Gerber for filing it.

If I start a religion where if you look upon or listen to any advertising, intentional or not, you will be stricken down to a demonic hell, do you think the ASASA would respond to my request for all public advertising to be banned, on the grounds that it deeply upsets and offends my religious beliefs.
Logged
Rigil Kent
Clotting Factor
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +19/-3
Offline Offline

Posts: 2467


Three men make a tiger.


« Reply #3 on: January 16, 2012, 12:55:35 PM »

 Do you agree with the ruling?

No I don't agree. Any church should be allowed to sling mud and throw stones as they please, and place their religious propaganda on billboards. Unless the billboard, through irresponsible positioning, partly obscures a second one depicting lingerie models.

Rigil
Logged
Mefiante
Defollyant Iconoclast
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +61/-9
Online Online

Posts: 3757


In solidarity with rwenzori: Κοπρος φανεται


WWW
« Reply #4 on: January 16, 2012, 13:31:42 PM »

It may look silly and petty on the surface, but it has real value in raising public awareness of atheism — specifically, (1) that not everyone buys into long-established dogma, and (2) that such dogma can be offensive to some by its implied untruths whose sole purpose is divisive.  This kind of action is necessary to weaken religions’ grip on society because reason simply doesn’t work.  As an atheist of long standing, I feel affronted by religions’ continual and repeated demands for special considerations.  I’m not comfortable with the thought that there’s an unchallenged widespread perception among the religious that atheists are deluded and/or daft and/or immoral and/or innately evil people, and on all of these grounds, I for one applaud Mr Gerber’s opposition and initiative.

Besides the difficulty of getting a religion that disdains all advertising formally recognised, the ASA has no mandate to impose a blanket ban on all advertising.  The ASA can only consider particular instances of advertising that are alleged to contravene its Advertising Code.  In any case, many religions and sects clamour for all sorts of ridiculous things that they won’t get.

'Luthon64
Logged
BoogieMonster
NP complete
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +19/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 3128



« Reply #5 on: January 16, 2012, 13:50:34 PM »

This person saw a contravention of the law/guidelines, and reported it. I cannot fault him for it.

IMHO this should have been done on the basis of the ad making untrue claims:
* atheists have no intelligence/empty heads
* they believe they are here by accident. (Some may but it's not all inclusive)

I couldn't care about him being offended, to be honest. People get offended by lots of things, I value my right to free speech much higher than my "right" not to be offended.

This also sets a precedent that would prevent all kinds of atheist advertising in the vein of Dawkin's posters. But it could still be done as long as they are very PC and not directed at a certain faith.

Logged
Hermes
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +18/-2
Offline Offline

Posts: 1137



« Reply #6 on: January 16, 2012, 15:06:40 PM »

Note how restrictive this clause is once the ands and ors are highlighted.

Clause 1 of Section II states, inter alia, “No advertising may offend against good taste or decency or be offensive to public or sectoral values and sensitivities, unless the advertising is reasonable and justifiable in an open and democratic society based on human dignity, equality and freedom”.

I agree with BoogieMonster that I would have preferred the billboard to be banned based on being untrue rather than offensive.  Considering the way in which the ASA adjudicates, I support Mr. Gerber's initiative.

Logged
GCG
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +8/-4
Offline Offline

Posts: 1829


skeptical mantis is skeptical


adele horn
WWW
« Reply #7 on: January 16, 2012, 15:15:11 PM »

Funnily enough, I saw this billboard too, and I was irked, of not offended.  I sent them a mail in that regard actually (I fibbed, as to not give away my true evil intentions of trolling:
Quote
Good Day

My husband and I are debating the meaning of the new billboard outside your premises on South Road.
I think, the words and the image of the depressed man, means that being an atheist comes from being depressed, and that comes from having a mental health problem.
My husband thinks it means that being an atheist, can only lead to unhappiness.

Can you please help us with the meaning of how the words and the image.  Also, could you possibly send me a copy of that image, I forgot to take a picture when we there last.

Blessings
Adele

I got a response from Kogi Nareen, Personal Assistant to Senior Pastors, Rivers Church
Quote
Good day Adele,
Thank you for so much your enquiry about our billboard, we are glad that it has stimulated interest.   
We are a creative church, that enjoy thinking out the box and as such  the image and quote was intended to stir interest and provoke people to think about their relationship with God. The idea behind the advert  is loosely based on Psalm 14:1 . The fool[a] says in his heart, “There is no God.
There is no implication that an atheist is depressed or has mental health issues, but is rather someone who is not really thinking about the purpose of life and the reality of creation.

Logged
benguela
Full Member
***

Skeptical ability: +3/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 223


An infinitesimal subset of the observable universe


benguela
WWW
« Reply #8 on: January 16, 2012, 16:05:34 PM »

I disagree with the ruling. As long as the money to pay for the billboard was private they can put up whatever they like, even if there are no true statements on it.
Logged
Mefiante
Defollyant Iconoclast
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +61/-9
Online Online

Posts: 3757


In solidarity with rwenzori: Κοπρος φανεται


WWW
« Reply #9 on: January 16, 2012, 19:18:14 PM »

As long as the money to pay for the billboard was private…
Is it, though?  The spending of donations by any registered charity is subject to stringent audits, which makes it difficult to argue that those donations are strictly private funds.  Also, as a private recipient of any donations, one is obliged to make appropriate disclosures and pay commensurate dues.  The same rules don’t apply in the case of religion merely because it is religion, so the argument could be made that the monies, or at least an appreciable fraction thereof, are public by virtue of being both unaudited and tax exempt.

'Luthon64
Logged
brianvds
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +13/-0
Online Online

Posts: 1866



WWW
« Reply #10 on: January 16, 2012, 19:18:59 PM »

Given the law the ruling is probably in line with it. I disagree with the law and with Mr Gerber for filing it.

If I start a religion where if you look upon or listen to any advertising, intentional or not, you will be stricken down to a demonic hell, do you think the ASASA would respond to my request for all public advertising to be banned, on the grounds that it deeply upsets and offends my religious beliefs.

I tend to agree. The ASA has a long history of spoiling everyone's fun anyway, and must have banned half of Nando's ads.

Personally, I very much WANT the fundies to shout their hatred and ignorance from the rooftops. It does them more harm than anyone else.
« Last Edit: January 17, 2012, 06:33:33 AM by brianvds » Logged
Mefiante
Defollyant Iconoclast
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +61/-9
Online Online

Posts: 3757


In solidarity with rwenzori: Κοπρος φανεται


WWW
« Reply #11 on: January 16, 2012, 19:34:51 PM »

Personally, I very much WANT the fundies to shout their hatred and ignorance from the rooftops. It does them more harm than anyone else.
I think this point is perhaps too idealistic.  It implicitly assumes that people are smarter and/or more courageous than they actually are.  If a sizeable fraction of religious people were able to see the lunacy and have the brass tacks to object to it, we’d never have gotten into the situation where fundamentalism enjoys the prevalence it does.  Sam Harris’ argument re concentric circles of diminishing reasonableness springs to mind here.  In short, if enough people could see fundies’ absurdity, religion wouldn’t enjoy the foothold it does.

'Luthon64
Logged
brianvds
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +13/-0
Online Online

Posts: 1866



WWW
« Reply #12 on: January 17, 2012, 06:36:09 AM »

Personally, I very much WANT the fundies to shout their hatred and ignorance from the rooftops. It does them more harm than anyone else.
I think this point is perhaps too idealistic.  It implicitly assumes that people are smarter and/or more courageous than they actually are.  If a sizeable fraction of religious people were able to see the lunacy and have the brass tacks to object to it, we’d never have gotten into the situation where fundamentalism enjoys the prevalence it does.  Sam Harris’ argument re concentric circles of diminishing reasonableness springs to mind here.  In short, if enough people could see fundies’ absurdity, religion wouldn’t enjoy the foothold it does.

Yes. Which is why I want them to shout it from the rooftops. :-)

One is in favour of freedom of expression or not. I am in favour of it. That includes the freedom of people whom I don't like to express their views.
Logged
Benjammin
Newbie
*

Skeptical ability: +2/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 36



« Reply #13 on: January 17, 2012, 07:24:31 AM »

Re: Mefiante

The complaint makes atheists look petty and litigious, and I don't want the public to become aware of atheists if this is their perception. If someone makes a stupid argument, and Plasm 14.1 is a stupid argument, then lets argue back, it is normally the religious who when they run out of arguments (fairly quickly) start suing and complaining about offensive and respect. No. You have the right to offend me and you don't have to respect me.
Logged
Mefiante
Defollyant Iconoclast
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +61/-9
Online Online

Posts: 3757


In solidarity with rwenzori: Κοπρος φανεται


WWW
« Reply #14 on: January 17, 2012, 08:17:25 AM »

The complaint makes atheists look petty and litigious, and I don't want the public to become aware of atheists if this is their perception.
Maybe so, but the religious anyway already have a much distorted view of atheists.  People will make of things what they will, as instanced in this thread.  Following Mr Gerber’s complaint, one would hope that the religious will be a little more circumspect about demonising atheism, which is where I see the complaint’s consciousness-raising value, as described in an earlier post.

And I’m all for freedom of expression.  Nonetheless, there are good reasons why we have injunctions against hate-speech, of which this billboard was a mild case in its disparagement of the atheist demographic.

'Luthon64
Logged
Benjammin
Newbie
*

Skeptical ability: +2/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 36



« Reply #15 on: January 17, 2012, 09:16:35 AM »

Maybe so, but the religious anyway already have a much distorted view of atheists.  People will make of things what they will, as instanced in this thread.  Following Mr Gerber’s complaint, one would hope that the religious will be a little more circumspect about demonising atheism, which is where I see the complaint’s consciousness-raising value, as described in an earlier post.

And I’m all for freedom of expression.  Nonetheless, there are good reasons why we have injunctions against hate-speech, of which this billboard was a mild case in its disparagement of the atheist demographic.

'Luthon64
g

How can you be all for freedom of expression and want some expression to be censored? Firstly this is a very mild form of hate speech if at all, if calling someone a fool is hate speech, Christopher Hitchens was guilty, I would think most atheist are. Secondly atheists are not a poor persecuted minority that need protection from stupid arguments.

This complaint legitimises shutting down speech without making an argument, and that benefits the religious not the atheists. If instead you put up a bill board saying something like "only a fool accepts a belief based on no evidence and no reasons" that would be a much better response, but now the religious can force you to take that down because it upsets them, well done.

Logged
BoogieMonster
NP complete
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +19/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 3128



« Reply #16 on: January 17, 2012, 09:36:34 AM »

Quote
but now the religious can force you to take that down because it upsets them, well done.

This.

If I had to pick a world to live in, it would be one where people were free to say what they want, whether I like it or not.

The only real problematic thing for me is "inciting violence", but then, at the end of the day it's equivalent to conspiring to commit a crime, and may not need additional provisions in the first place.
Logged
Mefiante
Defollyant Iconoclast
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +61/-9
Online Online

Posts: 3757


In solidarity with rwenzori: Κοπρος φανεται


WWW
« Reply #17 on: January 17, 2012, 09:41:14 AM »

How can you be all for freedom of expression and want some expression to be censored?
It seems you didn’t read what I wrote with due care.

'Luthon64
Logged
Tweefo
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +10/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 1551



WWW
« Reply #18 on: January 17, 2012, 09:44:16 AM »

Quote
If instead you put up a bill board saying something like "only a fool accepts a belief based on no evidence and no reasons" that would be a much better response
That would be a very nice bill board to put up, problem is, we can't. Lack of funds - we don't have a lot of people buying eternity. I must agree with the no vote here. Better to have free speech even if you don't agree with it.
Logged
GCG
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +8/-4
Offline Offline

Posts: 1829


skeptical mantis is skeptical


adele horn
WWW
« Reply #19 on: January 17, 2012, 09:58:07 AM »

why should 'we' give a shit about billboards, or spreading any form of 'message'.  is this not what a religion does?  isnt the viewpoint of the atheist mind, that we dont give a shit?  when you want to put up billboards, you are recruiting....  when you refer to 'we', does this imply that there is a structured orginization..... like a church?
Logged
Tweefo
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +10/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 1551



WWW
« Reply #20 on: January 17, 2012, 10:06:11 AM »

why should 'we' give a shit about billboards, or spreading any form of 'message'.  is this not what a religion does?  isnt the viewpoint of the atheist mind, that we dont give a shit?  when you want to put up billboards, you are recruiting....  when you refer to 'we', does this imply that there is a structured orginization..... like a church?
Point taken, but sometimes one want to have a say.
Logged
Benjammin
Newbie
*

Skeptical ability: +2/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 36



« Reply #21 on: January 17, 2012, 10:46:02 AM »

It seems you didn’t read what I wrote with due care.'Luthon64

I went back and re-read what you said. You are claiming that this should be shut down on hate speech grounds:

Quote from: Mefiante
Nonetheless, there are good reasons why we have injunctions against hate-speech, of which this billboard was a mild case in its disparagement of the atheist demographic.

Disparagement does not equal hate speech. This was taken down as it infringed on advertising standards, not free speech standards, if the pastor wants to say this in Sunday Mass he can, because it is not hate speech. This site is constantly disparaging all sorts of things, that is not hate. Hate would be if they put up a sign, "kill an atheist today, go to heaven tomorrow", now that would be hate speech. So I don't think the reason you give is legitimate, and I don't think it will lead to Christians thinking better of atheists nor be helpful in the future. I am much more interested in free speech than peoples feelings. I normally agree with most of your comments but in this I think you are completely missing the point.

Logged
Benjammin
Newbie
*

Skeptical ability: +2/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 36



« Reply #22 on: January 17, 2012, 11:00:20 AM »

The Indelible Stamp gets it http://tauriqmoosa.wordpress.com/2012/01/16/offended-atheist-gets-stupid-christian-billboard-taken-down/

Quote
Just because I don’t agree with this ruling (at the moment, since perhaps there’s an argument that might persuade me otherwise), does not mean I’m saying we should be soft on religion. In fact, this is not even about religion. This is more important. It concerns how we defend and articulate free speech and expression, since, by definition, free speech only make sense if you can defend the right of your worst enemies to express themselves too.
Logged
GCG
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +8/-4
Offline Offline

Posts: 1829


skeptical mantis is skeptical


adele horn
WWW
« Reply #23 on: January 17, 2012, 11:00:58 AM »

why should 'we' give a shit about billboards, or spreading any form of 'message'.  is this not what a religion does?  isnt the viewpoint of the atheist mind, that we dont give a shit?  when you want to put up billboards, you are recruiting....  when you refer to 'we', does this imply that there is a structured orginization..... like a church?
Point taken, but sometimes one want to have a say.

the good book has cleverly made it so, that any kind of 'say' us lot have to say, is 'from the devil'.  so any sense we want to drum into them, will just have them clutching their crucifixes even harder.  
best defence?   dont even bother.  vent and rant with fellow skeptics, and leave the woo to their stupidness.
i must say, though, that when they start getting fucking retarded, i will step in.
Logged
Mefiante
Defollyant Iconoclast
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +61/-9
Online Online

Posts: 3757


In solidarity with rwenzori: Κοπρος φανεται


WWW
« Reply #24 on: January 17, 2012, 11:07:57 AM »

I went back and re-read what you said. You are claiming that this should be shut down on hate speech grounds:…
No, I’m not.  You really need to pay closer attention.

'Luthon64
Logged
BoogieMonster
NP complete
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +19/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 3128



« Reply #25 on: January 17, 2012, 11:41:26 AM »

Quote
best defence?   dont even bother.  vent and rant with fellow skeptics, and leave the woo to their stupidness

Ya know, I think this is a case of persistently wearing people down. You're right that there are no instant wins and it's very demotivating. Some people are just beyond argument for good. But we should note that secularism is on the rise and it's in no small part due to the four horse men (now three. Cry): Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris and Dennett.

This ain't no battle but we shouldn't just give up. I engage, sometimes publicly, religious people and shoot down the same same arguments over and over and over. Hopefully eventually it starts to sink in.
Logged
Hermes
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +18/-2
Offline Offline

Posts: 1137



« Reply #26 on: January 17, 2012, 16:16:25 PM »

The Indelible Stamp gets it..

No, (s)he does not.
There is no unified structure in how atheists conceive themselves.

Quite so, but it was the billboard that ascribed certain attributes to "the atheist"; Mr. Gerber responded to that.
He’s doing what our opponents do:

Why should he not do it?  The problem here lies neither with Mr. Gerber nor the ASA's ruling, but with the law itself.  If the rules of the game are flawed and your opponent exploits those flaws, one would be foolish to play the game according to what one believes the rules should be.  Such a cavalier approach would ensure that one loses the game.  It is the law that should be under fire, not Mr. Gerber for exploiting it.  Some people are shooting in the wrong direction here.
Logged
Jacques
Full Member
***

Skeptical ability: +4/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 132


JacquesR
WWW
« Reply #27 on: January 17, 2012, 17:01:14 PM »

Here's a picture of the billboard that caused all the trouble: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2087778/Churchs-anti-atheist-billboard-banned-advertising-watchdog.html

Mild satire, in my view, and I'm offended that anyone found it worthy of complaint.
Logged
brianvds
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +13/-0
Online Online

Posts: 1866



WWW
« Reply #28 on: January 18, 2012, 06:30:51 AM »

Here's a picture of the billboard that caused all the trouble: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2087778/Churchs-anti-atheist-billboard-banned-advertising-watchdog.html

Mild satire, in my view, and I'm offended that anyone found it worthy of complaint.


Quote: "Pulled down: Officials ruled a billboard erected outside a Johannesburg church that suggested atheists considered their existence to be accidental was likely to be found offensive."

And as others pointed out, the real question here isn't whether it is offensive (I find it mildly offensive myself) but why on this earth it is necessary to wage an endless war against offense. Society will never make any progress at all if no one is ever offended.

If the fundies have the right to put up offensive anti-atheism billboards, that means I ALSO have the right to put up my own offensive anti-religious billboards. That is just how I like it.

« Last Edit: January 18, 2012, 11:27:54 AM by brianvds » Logged
Rigil Kent
Clotting Factor
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +19/-3
Offline Offline

Posts: 2467


Three men make a tiger.


« Reply #29 on: January 18, 2012, 07:41:53 AM »

... why on this earth it is necessary to wage an endless war against offense.
Amen to that.

Rigil
Logged
BoogieMonster
NP complete
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +19/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 3128



« Reply #30 on: January 18, 2012, 09:39:38 AM »

Steve Hughes - Offended
Logged
cyghost
Skeptically yours
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +12/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 1410


Carpe diem


« Reply #31 on: January 18, 2012, 14:48:12 PM »

Awesome  Cheesy
Logged
GCG
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +8/-4
Offline Offline

Posts: 1829


skeptical mantis is skeptical


adele horn
WWW
« Reply #32 on: January 18, 2012, 15:10:35 PM »

o lol'd IRL
Logged
Jacques
Full Member
***

Skeptical ability: +4/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 132


JacquesR
WWW
« Reply #33 on: January 26, 2012, 10:17:22 AM »

My comment on this, in case anyone's still interested in the issue: http://synapses.co.za/privilege-finding-offensive/
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [All]   Go Up
  Print  


 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
Page created in 1.18 seconds with 23 sceptic queries.
Google visited last this page May 14, 2019, 19:57:34 PM
Privacy Policy