Bill O’Reilly Can’t Deal with Atheist Sign in Washington

He clearly thinks that the government has endorsed Christianity and rightly so. He clearly thinks atheists have no right to speak out because of “tradition,” his code word for majority tyranny. He clearly favors freedom of his speech and no one else’s. O’Really is the kind of guy who gives fascist pig blowhards a bad name.

Even Rupert Murdoch hates him if you can imagine that.

I don’t think the point was to convert anyone. I’m pretty sure the intent is to highlight the fact that letting any religious group put their propaganda on publicly owned property is a bad idea. I believe the permanent plaque that will replace this temporary sign has a reverse side that reads “Keep religion out of government.”

I don’t really approve of any of these displays in my state’s capitol building. But as far as I’m concerned, they brought this on themselves by insisting on allowing displays sponsored by private religious groups. If you allow one, you have to allow them all, Bill. And really, you’re barking up the wrong tree by harassing Governor Gregoire. She had nothing to do with it.

Is there anything funnier than seeing this belligerent lunatic accuse others of being “nutty”? Classic.

In the talking points Jesus is a religious figure, then in the segment directly following, he’s “philosopher Jesus” so it’s allowed. Nice spin in the “non spin
zone”.

yes, I think you meant

“as any religious group”

not

“as any other religious group”

I bet Stephen Colbert is outraged as well.

The problem you make is with a (possibly) false assumption. Is the goal of this sign to change minds or express ourselves? Unlike Christians, we are not in ‘evangelist’ mode all the time, and I see this as just an honest expression of our thoughts on the matter.

I want to know where I can buy my own blond bimbo bobblehead like Bill has! He tried to pin this on political correctness rather than that pesky freedom of speech thing.

Well if Bill O’Reilly is mad, I’m sure Bill Donahue is somewhere close behind…

I love this line –

“We don’t celebrate Ramadan in this country because we’re not Muslem. Christmas is a federal holiday because our traditions are… JudeoChristian”

Simultaneously trying to be inclusive and dismissive of Jews in the same soundbite.

I’m with the folks who would have preferred a more positive message on the sign though.

And another thought – rather than wage war on Christmas, how about a movement to move it back to October (?) for the sake of truth?

The thing is the FFRF is not trying to participate in the holiday display. They are being a scrooge. Their sign is humbug. Granted, some people would be pissed at any sign put up by atheists. But I don’t see why they have to turn a holiday celebration into a protest. It’s just bad form. As a visible and vocal atheist, I find it embarrassing.

At least a FSM light display would have been fun. 🙂 Or maybe a giant box wrapped up in festive paper with some kind of secular holiday message on it? Maybe something about peace or a winter-wonderland kind of thing. How about a simple message like “Happy Holidays from the FFRF. Support the separation of church and state.”

Why are the public atheists so unimaginative? I don’t think everything we do to make ourselves seen and included has to be combative and rude. We complain when Christians are that way, and yet we constantly lower ourselves to the same level. It’s very discouraging.

Frankly, I’m sick of the anger and arguing. Yes, a lot of atheists are angry. And that sign has an angry tone. I don’t think pissing off anyone, including Bill O’Reilly, is productive. That’s not to say that I want to avoid pissing people off, because that’s impossible. The existence of atheists pisses some people off and that’s just too bad. But we don’t have to go out of our way to be annoying.

I agree with those who say it’s time to be for something instead of always being against things. I really like the Colorado billboards for that reason. I’m personally going to be working toward doing what I can to shift the atheist movement in a more positive direction in 2009.

OK, I’ll stop. Is it bad form to write comments that are longer than the original post?

grazatt,

Even Rupert Murdoch hates him if you can imagine that.

What???? Tell me more, please.

It’s in a new book about Murdoch, The Man Who Owns the News by Michael Wolff.

I disagree. Here’s why:

There shouldn’t be any religious displays on government property. Private religious groups lobbied the state legislature to allow them to put up displays they paid for themselves. But they’re still on public property I’m paying to maintain with my tax dollars (yes, I’m a WA resident). While this sign is probably pissing a lot of people off, there is nothing inherently negative in it. It isn’t directed at any particular religion. It simply states an opinion that is held by a significant portion of the population, which is the same as any religious display. To be fair, I’m pissed off about the nativity scene sitting next to it. Maybe the people that are pissed off will think twice about allowing such statements to be displayed on public grounds.

I do question how effective the Freedom From Religion Foundation’s sign is — will it really get any religious people to change their mind?

I ask again, what sort of “changing of mind” are you referring to?

First of all, O’Reilly does not speak for all Christians.

His tone makes me sad, in that it shouts “if you don’t shut up and do what you’re told, I’m gonna sick the majority on you. We’re bigger than you… nya nya”

There’s that same arrogant American bully mentality that makes us the country that the world loves to hate.

I think some of you are missing an important part of the story. It’s not sitting next to a tree. It’s sitting next to this.

I guess what I’m wondering is if people would be less up in arms about a sign that read “There is no God but Allah, and Muhammed is his prophet.” Probably not, but if we start telling groups what beliefs they’re allowed to post, we’re showing preference for one religion over another (or lack thereof).

If I had a time machine and could only take one trip back in time (of course it’d be round-trip), it’d be to convince the founding fathers to put explicit language supporting the separation of church and state in the Constitution.

I suppose if O’Reilly is mad, FFRF is doing something right.

When isn’t Billo mad about something?

This article has some quotes from the book about Murdoch and how he feels about O’Reilly

Thanks for the link, Ravelyn.

I wrote:

I support the first amendment rights for people to post whatever religious or non-religious displays in the state capitol, provided that everyone is allowed.

I’m sure you’re getting calls from all of Bill O’Reilly’s viewers on this subject. Bill seems to agree with freedom of speech only when it’s speech he agrees with.

I’m not generally for religious displays or anti-religious displays on state property, as I think there’s ample space for this type of speech where it won’t be confused for a state endorsement. But as long as the state provides a public speech forum, all beliefs should be allowed in.

Thank you.

grazatt,
No, I haven’t read it, I watched an interview which you can see here with the author on Keith Olbermann’s “Countdown,” aired yesterday. Olbermann’s disorientation (and delight) at having one of his two arch enemies despising the other is hilarious to see.

I agree with Bill If you wanted a sign with darwin on it put it up but dont denegrate our religion its a good thing yall did it in washington because it wouldnt fly in mississippi

If anyone seems to have an insecurity about peoples right to believe something or not believe something and have it displayed publicly in a positive way it is this group of atheists who are making these displays. I am not Jewish. Yet I dont feel a need to make a display explaining why their beliefs differ with mine during the holidays. I like seeing how people of other beliefs and cultures express themselves in a positive way.

Let’s call this display by this group what it is. Something to piss people off. It’s not something there to make a statement for freedom of speech. Should people just keep making signs in public countering one another in a negative way? No. This is best left ignored. People celebrate the holidays for all sorts of reasons and this just makes atheists look like people who are out to suck the life out of a time of year that brings enjoyment to people.
This is negative attention seeking and it doesnt impress me much that people who consider themselves atheists agree with this display just because this group that made it also happens to be an atheist organization. It’s an unintelligent and inappropriate way to go about making a point.