If Bill O’Reilly thinks our state’s opinion leaders are going to follow his lead in whipping up a tempest in teapot over the Atheist display in the state Capitol, he has another thing coming:
The state of Washington seems to have hit on the right approach for a nation that evolved because of people seeking the right to worship as they want. This year, the state Capitol displays not only a menorah, commemorating the eight-day Jewish festival of Hanukkah, and a Nativity scene depicting the Christmas story, but also a statement of a thoroughly dissenting opinion. The Freedom From Religion Foundation has placed a sign that reads: “Religion is but myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds.”
The pluralism of the holiday display might be a little unruly, but it is a reasonable alternative to stripping from government buildings any reference to these holidays that are such an important part of many citizens’ lives.
Gov. Gregoire’s staff has fielded thousands of calls since O’Reilly started broadcasting her phone number on TV and radio, but staffers tell me they’re mostly coming from out of state, and I’ve got news for Billo and his legion of angry automatons… out-of-staters don’t pay taxes here in our Washington, and they sure as hell don’t vote. So they shouldn’t expect more than passing attention from our very busy governor.
Personally, I don’t much disagree with the content of the “Reasons Greetings” sign, though I would not have definitively stated that religion “hardens hearts and enslaves minds,” (it can and sometimes does, but not always), and I certainly wouldn’t have placed such an unnecessarily anti-religious message in a holiday display. But one doesn’t have to defend the message to defend the messenger’s right to express it on an equal footing with other religious groups. In Washington, as in the rest of the nation, government simply cannot express preference for one religion over another, nor for religion over non-religion.
The consequences of the First Amendment may at times be messy and irritating or even offensive, but the rights enunciated within provide the bulwark from which all our rights are protected. This near absolute reverence for freedom of religion, speech and the press was a uniquely American invention, and has always been our nation’s greatest strength.
So if I had the opportunity to answer O’Reilly’s questions with one of my own, I suppose I’d ask Billo… “Why do you hate America?”
People bashing religion are “exercising their First Amendment rights,” but O’Reilly bashing the bashers, or bashing Gregoire, “hates America?”
Goldy seems to have a double standard … again.
Goldy, remember, as irritated or offended as you may be, O’Reilly is merely exercising his First Amendment rights.
Goldy spews:
So Goldy…then why should “out-of-staters” have the right to put Atheist Garbage in the State Capital????
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?
Goldy: You have it ass-backwards. O’Reilly is railing against you guys who are so bent on destroying the American fabric.
Goldy–
Gregoire had 100% control over WHEN and WHERE this antagonistic Atheist statement is put.
She could have easily put it anywhere besides next to the Nativity Scene and anytime (she could have waited until AFTER Christmas is over.
That is 100% in her power.
Gregoire is a coward…and hardly a Catholic.
She COULD also have sent the Atheist statement back and requested that they re-do it in a positive message about what they believe.
She didn’t do that either.
Gregoire is reaaaaaaaaaal lucky Christmas wasn’t in October!
Billo makes his money by pushing this sort of thing.
Still, it does seem to me that the aetheist group is doing their own hate mongering. How far should free speach go?
Suppose, for example, some antipopery group wanted to post a screed acccusing the Church of missaapropriating Saturnalia, ritual cannabilism at the mass, and priestly pedastry? Wouldn’t posting such an attack ad in the space with the manger restrict the free speach of the Chistians by provoking hate?
While I believe in untrammeled free speach, isn’t the intent to assure we all have a voice rather than to create public arenas for verbal combat?
Goldy–
I think you may find yourself back on O’Reilly soon. Perhaps you can think about a better wardrobe and not make such a fool out of yourself this time.
Perhaps Bill can get Joe the Plumber on with you and give you some FREE advice on your leaky faucet?
Good thing you are an Atheist Goldy.
You are giving off a whole lot of bad Karma…
God tells us not to worry about retribution toward people like you Goldy, He’ll take care of it.
I encourage my Jewish as a Religion and Christian brothers & sisters not to wish Goldy or any of his followers bad will.
If Rush has dittoheads, OReilly has dumbheads. Do you cretins think the State’s CEO should dpend her time at this level? I assume this decision was made by Jo the Assistant Building Manager.
What we really have is the clash of half assed provocateurs trying, successfully, to get attenton.
“At this season of the Winter Solstice may reason prevail. There are no gods, no devils, no angels, no heaven or hell. There is only our natural world. Religion is but myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds.“
IMO it’s the negative, provocative nature of the statement that makes this an issue. I personally don’t have a problem with people excersising their freedom of religion. I do have a problem with this type of expression. It’s negative, devisive, hurtful etc. Whereas the other expressions are uplifting, positive expressions, the atheist chose hurtful rhetoric. I guess that if this is how aethists really feel, and wholly endorse this display, then I put aetheists in the the category of other negative, devisive religions. Violent fundamentalist (insert religion here)….
2:
Why should out of state-ers be allowed to post here?
Troll @1,
Bill has every right to hate America.
Well said Goldy. If people keep irrationally insisting on religious displays on government property, then the government has to take displays from all religious and non-religious groups and give them equal displays. The easier solution would seem to be to leave religious displays to the private sector. Neocons, however, want to relegate truly public services to the private sector (education, transportation, energy, and now even military), and at the same time insist on some sort of governmental role for religious institutions. Let’s face it, Bill OReilly and his ilk simply want an unfettered, unchallenged, government sponsored Christmas display. A wish that is quintessentially un-American and banned by the First Amendment to the Constitution.
The other thing that always amazes me is how supposedly religious people take comfort in the secularization of their religious symbols as a way of getting them approved for government display. How could a truly religious person sanction that?
o’reilly radio show no longer a factor–fails
http://www.associatedcontent.c.....g_off.html
Yes, well said, Goldy:
Billo and the people he’s imitating seem to be saying that freedom of religion in America means that you are free to embrace and practice any kind of Christianity you want.
@8
IMO it’s the negative, provocative nature of the statement that makes this an issue. I personally don’t have a problem with people excersising their freedom of religion. I do have a problem with this type of expression. It’s negative, devisive, hurtful etc. Whereas the other expressions are uplifting, positive expressions,
What is so uplifting about the message that if you do not accept Christ as your savior that you will burn in hell for all eternity?
@13: Reminds me of that scene from The Blues Brothers:
Elwood: What kind of music do you usually have here?
Claire: Oh, we got both kinds: Country and Western
Better to have our states “CEO” focused on this, rather than screwing the fundamentals up more than she already has. Deluge and distract her for the next four years, the more time she spends on this the less time she spends making taxpayers and businesses bend over
@8 “IMO it’s the negative, provocative nature of the statement that makes this an issue.”
I would think that the views of those who put up the sign are no more representative of all atheists than the views of those who erected the nativity are representative all Christians. Both can express their views any day of the year. That said, for my part I don’t think the sign was in good taste. These days it seems that everybody wants to ruin everybody else’s party. It isn’t left or right, Christian or atheist – everybody’s doing it to some degree.
Sorry OT but this crap just doesn’t end!
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.....-stylists/
And these right wing morons split guts over haircuts?
goldy, go back to your own country
@17
These days it seems that everybody wants to ruin everybody else’s party. It isn’t left or right, Christian or atheist – everybody’s doing it to some degree.
Speaking for myself, I don’t want to ruin anyone else’s party, I just don’t want them partying on public property. Why can’t religion stay at home, in houses of worship, and on private property? Is that really too much to ask? It seems that those that insist on a governmental display of religion are seeking what they cannot have, which is the government’s imprimatur and endorsement of that religion in a transparent effort to coerce or proselytize citizens into joining their faith.
goldy, when i see your sickening face on tv, i think of 2 things. one, the only face more sickening to look at is chuck schumer, second, in the movie “the stand” by steven king. when society breaks down a van load of journalists demand access to an army base, the seargent looks at them and says, we dont have to listen to you pinko commies anymore. goldylocks, i cant wait to say that to you, as you drive off wondering why the new world order embraces christianity.
Goldy–
So where is your answer??
2. Mr. Cynical spews:
Goldy spews:
So Goldy…then why should “out-of-staters” have the right to put Atheist Garbage in the State Capital????
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?
Kind of a tough one fer ya, ain’t it!
I’m glad to see Gregoire isn’t giving in to these right wing, Faux News viewing Christian freaks. If Rossi had been elected he’d have been bending over for BillO long ago.
Not only does the Atheist display have a right to be there but everything it says is 100% true.
Gregoire had 100% control over WHEN and WHERE this antagonistic Atheist statement is put.
She could have easily put it anywhere besides next to the Nativity Scene and anytime (she could have waited until AFTER Christmas is over.
That is 100% in her power.
Gregoire is a coward…and hardly a Catholic.
She COULD also have sent the Atheist statement back and requested that they re-do it in a positive message about what they believe.
She didn’t do that either.
Wow this is turning into a wingnut heads explosion fest like that moronic “natural birth” tempest.
Keep it up wingnuts. You’re grinding yourselves into the dust.
Upton–
I agree the out-of-state Atheists have rights…it’s Gregoire’s decision WHEN and precisely WHERE, not theirs.
Also, why can’t the Atheist’s put a positive spin on their belief? Because they cannot without going out of their way to offend believers?
C’mon…at least try:
Something like that…..rather than strong opinions against others beliefs.
Try again Wisconsin Atheists!
BTW, it is odd Gregoire wouldn’t try to draw the line on out-of-staters displaying stuff, isn’t it?
YLB–
Goldy will not answer simple questions.
It’s his head which is exploded…along with his plumbing.
With that Atheist Faith, perhaps a miracle will happen on his plumbing?
This just in. O’Loofah’s pollution of the AM and satellite radio bands ends:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/28069031/for/cnbc/
Cynical… why do you hate America?
27 – Whose questions? Yours? Why should he take orders from the likes of you?
Mr. Cynical,
I don’t think there’s much question that down through history religion has enslaved minds.
Nor do I think there’s much doubt that religion has a tendency to harden hearts…the religious right is an excellent example of that.
@14
What is so uplifting about the message that if you do not accept Christ as your savior that you will burn in hell for all eternity?
I’m sorry, I missed where that was on display at the capital. But I’ll bite. If someone were to put up a display on behalf of Christians that made such a statement, I would protest that person or group as not representating Christians.
If Aethiests wish to be represented by displays such as the one at the capital, then it’s indicative of them as a whole.
Just like Christians, such as myselft, protest anything sprewed by racists, white supremists, kkk etc in the name of Christianity. Those folks are shouted down by Christians as hateful idiots whom do not represent Chritians.
@17
I see what you’re saying. I only submit that the tone and provacative wording of the display is what it at issue. If the sign were a positive statement regarding Aetheism I doubt there would be an issue.
(and that is not what the group who put up the sign wants.)
@20 “It seems that those that insist on a governmental display of religion are seeking what they cannot have, which is the government’s imprimatur and endorsement of that religion”
Even as a Christian I agree with you. The whole thing seems agenda driven – desire for power, money and control can usually be found beneath whatever veneer of whatever group. That said, remove the displays from the capitol grounds and it’s not like Olympia is bereft of Christmas ornamentation. There is no war on Christmas. But there are certainly Christians who would replace our constitution with biblical law. Those particular folks aren’t my cup of tea. They’re really no different than those who would impose Sharia law. Alas, the dead aren’t around to tell us if having one’s head removed is better or worse than being stoned to death at the gates of the city.
SJNews, Olympia
Bill O’Reilly reports the mens rooms in the Washington State Legislature have viscious anti Christian profanities. “more evidence that Gov. Gregoire is not doing her job!”
@33 Yes, I agree. I suspect that the atheist group got exactly what they wanted and more. Perhaps that’s true of the other two groups as well. I don’t know. I can say that I am usually not offended by anybody’s expression of faith or belief that differs from my own. I can be irritated, even offended by those who indulge in dissing the faiths or beliefs of others. For me, the sign in question falls closer to the latter than the former.
The whole thing cracks me up. Thousands of anal retentive saviors of Christmas descend on Olympia to ensure their place on the pecking order. BillO has ruined Christmas for millions of Americans once again. Meanwhile normal people go about their daily lives ignoring the whole thing because…well…they can.
@35: SJ
That MUST be a false report. First, Bill O’ could not find the men’s room and second he doesn’t have the balls to go in there.
@ 1
Ironically, Billo Bumbly is exercising his first amendment rights in order to demand that others not be allowed to exercise their 1st amendment rights.
That demonstrates a complete hatred of America and the constitution.
“But one doesn’t have to defend the message to defend the messenger’s right to express it on an equal footing with other religious groups.”
Popular ideas and messages don’t need constitutional protection. The 1st Amendment was always intended to protect dissent.
@39 “Ironically, Billo Bumbly is exercising his first amendment rights in order to demand that others not be allowed to exercise their 1st amendment rights.”
Kind of like the Reconstructionist Christians being ‘persecuted’ for their beliefs – those beliefs, of course, include replacing the constitution with biblical law.
@8 If your criteria — hateful, divisive speech — determined who could speak there would be duct tape over the mouth of every wingnut in the country.
As Goldy said on Bill-O’s show: The last sentence is provocative. It got the attention they wanted and Bill-O bit. Hook, line and sinker. (Not word for word, but I think that is what Goldy meant). And Cyniclown falls right into the same trap.
only non christians have the right to free speech
Roger Rabbit Survey
After reading this thread, I’ve concluded the following trolls should be required to repeat 9th grade civics, especially the part about freedom of religion:
First and foremost, Mr. Cynical, whose ignorance of constitutional liberty stands ankles and knees below all the rest.
Dishonorable mentions to: John425, RightStuff, and ManofTruth, whose misunderstanding of constitutional law is right down there with the average inbred trailerpark moron’s.
It seems to me that government should simply promote all free speach. However, that can not include free speach that restricts other’s rights of free speach.
If a satanists wants to give sermon in a public place the fundies do not have the right tó prevent that speach with a riot.
It seems to me that the constructive answer here was just to aak both sides to delete anything derogatory of the other or relocate to another venue.
It seems to me that government should simply promote all free speach. However, that can not include free speach that restricts other’s rights of free speach.
If a satanists wants to give sermon in a public place the fundies do not have the right tó prevent that speach with a riot.
It seems to me that the constructive answer here was just to aak both sides to delete anything derogatory of the other or relocate to another venue.
29. Goldy spews:
That’s the best you could do??
I asked you to rationalize Out-of-State Capital displays in the face of your comment:
Checkmate Goldy! You lose.
Rog–
The fact is Gregoire had 100% control over WHEN and WHERE this antagonistic Atheist statement is put.
She could have easily put it anywhere besides next to the Nativity Scene and anytime (she could have waited until AFTER Christmas is over.
That is 100% in her power.
Gregoire is a coward…and hardly a Catholic.
She COULD also have sent the Atheist statement back and requested that they re-do it in a positive message about what they believe.
She didn’t do that either.
Show me WHY she doesn’t have the power to decide where & when???
Mr Cynical @ 48
As usual, you simply do not know what the fuck you are talking about. The sign was requested by Ms. Lois Walker from Shelton.
While it is true that she was a member of an organization that is based out-of-state, she made the request as a citizen of Washington. (I use the past tense because she has recently died—sometime after requesting the display.)
That the organization she belonged to was based out-of-state is entirely irrelevant. I mean, would a Lutheran from Ballard be disqualified from putting up a nativity scene simply because the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America is headquartered in Chicago? Or would a Catholic from Port Townsend be disqualified from putting up a nativity scene because the Catholic Church is headquartered in another country????
Thank GOD for Goldy Milhous Goldstein, savior of the First Amendment.
Republican McKenna knows GMG made the right call. Catholic schoolgirl Gregiore (you better not be wearing patent leather shoes, Christine) knows Goldy got it right. Jay @ ACLJ says Goldy’s spin wins.
Only lapsed Catholic Kirby, blubbering blubber, doesn’t get it. He says that state law would protect the public display of an atheist symbol, but does not protect the display of atheist hate speech emplaced in Olympia.
Silly Wilbur. Don’t you know that hate-speech codes protect only non-hetero non-male non-Christians? Christians are fair game for defamation and defilement. The Constitution says so, and thank GOD Goldy Milhous Goldstein’s laying his life on the line to protect it.
I sleep better at night knowing that Goldy’s lookin’ out for me. Praise GOD.
What say you?
While it is true that she was a member of an organization that is based out-of-state, she made the request as a citizen of Washington. (I use the past tense because she has recently died—sometime after requesting the display.)
—————
Ms. Walker passed away November 6, three weeks before the sign was displayed:
http://www.ffrf.org/news/2008/olympia.php
Has anyone considered the possibility that Gregoire, as a practicing Christian (she was raised Catholic but I think she and her husband now belong to a different denomination) might have figured that the best way to combat the atheists was to allow them to display an offensive sign and thus discredit their own cause?
That would be not at all unlike the way Goldy allows Cynical and the other trolls to post here and make utter fools of themselves.
The protections of the First Amendment are not respectful of state boundaries.
There are no “Constitution-free zones” in America.
A “riot” is not lawful expression or “speach” (sic), and thus is not protected. Neither is a physical beating, rape, or vandalism, even when those criminal acts are motivated by sincere religious faith or political view point.
Criticism is protected. Specifically.
It’s practically the whole point of the First Amendment. Even criticism that offends. Especially criticism that offends.
If you object to public displays of religious criticism because you find them offensive, the context of the First Amendment confines you then to objecting to public displays of religion. Welcome aboard!
It’s too bad that these legitimate religious perspectives can’t be expressed without offending you. But in all honesty, isn’t it fairly transparent that the point of the overt criticism of religion from the FFR was to spark just this kind of debate and thus put the entire display in legal jeopardy?
If you guys were really concerned about public expression of religion (and I assume this excludes Bill-O whose only concern is more money to buy “falafels”) you’d catch a clue and drop this. The logical endpoint of this pursuit is not the removal or altering of this one sign that you find offensive. That simply is not an option available to the Governor or the Legislature. Where this goes is ultimately the removal of all the displays. Falafel boy just wants ratings. Is that what the rest of you tools want?
Shorter FFR:
Dance, puppets! Dance!
@55 you’d catch a clue and drop this
——————–
Indeed. So moving on . . . is this your wonderful photography:
http://www.flickr.com/people/32905341@N00/
?
Nope. I can’t even draw. And I tend to break small, expensive technical gadgets.
For the etymology of ROTCODDAM see “Sinbad Jr.”.
@55 ROTTER
With all due respect, I obviously know that riot is not lawful speech. However that is not the issue. The issue is hecking .. in effect what this sign does.
The end result if heckling is Ok is that there is no free speech since only the least controversial person can be heard.
By posting this sign attacking religion, the effect is to heckle the manger scene. Put the other way, as an atheist myself, I feel we have far too little free speech because of majoritarian heckling.
My own preference would be for someone to have moved one or the other display so they were not in conflict or asked that antireligionists to post an affirmative statement about their (mine too) belief that no “god” can exist in this effed up world.
I rather suspect that sign too would eff off Billo but at least it is intended as free speech rather than preventing someone else’s free speech.
WTF?
The Atheist sign was requested by a woman from Shelton who died over a month ago??????????
This is beyond funny.
At least her journey is at a permanent end….by her own admission! She was a true Atheist. Now she is permanently DEAD….or worse. Her choice.
I saw the jackass from Wisconsin gloating over the sign.
Gregoire is a loooser.
lolatheistsareassholes.
O’Reilly and whomever was behind that sign have some nice mutual masturbation going there. Guess as long as they all are having fun, theres no harm to everyone else tho
A VERY SCARY CHRISTMAS
T’was the month before a non-secular holiday
And all through State Hall
Were displays that offended
Just about all…..
Baby Jesus was nestled all snug in the manger
Next to a sign that made Christians scream “danger”
The governor had settled down for a flight
To meet the next president, discuss our state’s plight
When on the TV there arose such a clatter
Viewers sprung from their chairs to see what was the matter
Another dow plunge, terror and fear?
Instead to our wondering eyes did appear
A blustering windbag spewing venom and hate
About the evil liberals in Washington State
As he built up his rampage every so slyly
We knew in a flash it must be Bill O’Reilly
He talked over guests and pontificated
A man whose huge ego can’t be satiated
He bellowed and shouted aglow on the screen
The biggest small issue we’d ever seen..
Now Bremner, now Goldy, now Christine Gregoire
On liberals and atheists, wherever you are
You must call the Governor, he cajoled and reasoned
To blame her for ruining the holiday season
Preferring to bully instead of persuade
He continued his anti liberal tirade
We all know of course, it goes with out stating
This whole exercise is about Neilson ratings
He exclaimed as he signed off the air for the night
“Merry Christmas to all, I’m Right, Right, Right, Right.”
WOW. O’Reilly PWNED you Goldstein. And I was rooting for you!
How could you let O’Winbag get away with this “Jesus is a philospher, and therefore a nativity is not religious” crap.
Seriously, you looked like the deer in the headlights. And YOU had the better argument.
Stage jitters?
Goldy,
You SHOULD have asked O’Reilly is he has beaten any other women lately.
Just an excerpt from the 2004 sexual harassment lawsuit (which OReilly settled to):
“During the course of this dinner, in approximately May 2003, Defendant BILL O’REILLY, without solicitation or invite, regaled Plaintiff and her friend with stories concerning the loss of his virginity to a girl in a car at JFK, two “really wild” Scandanavian airline stewardesses he had gotten together with, and a “girl” at a sex show in Thailand who had shown him things in a backroom that “blew [his] mind.” Defendant then stated he was going to Italy to meet the Pope, that his pregnant wife was staying at home with his daughter, and implied he was looking forward to some extra-marital dalliances with the “hot” Italian women.”
Bill O’reilly doesn’t hate America. He simply flngs arrows at morons who talk out of their arse about atheism (a form of religion itself). Atheists don’t need to denigrate Christmas to be recognized but if they want a war I have lots of guns and religion to cling to. The atheists don’t bother me until they start touching my personal property or harassing my family. I look forward to these moronic atheists interrupting our Christmas Tree Lane celebrations in Bellevue. I’ll be sure to give them a bit^ch slapping. But you know they won’t because they are pansy a$$e$