Why Was This Atheist Billboard Rejected by EMC Outdoor in Knoxville?

If that’s the line for offensive, one can never admit that they are simultaneously atheist and moral or happy.

To whom it may concern:

As an evangelical youth pastor from Canada, I have to say that I find your decision not to run the billboard advertising that God is not needed to care, love, etc., (the Center for Inquiry) is misguided and unfair. 

We’re all in this together, and from where I stand, I want to treat others the way I would want to be treated, even if I ultimately disagree with their message (well, actually I don’t disagree that atheists are very moral, caring and loving people. Atheists can be immoral too, but so can many supposed Christians. We can have a debate over where morality comes from, but that’s not the issue here). And while I don’t like the idea of putting up billboards myself very much (I think it cheapens the message), hey; if that’s your thing go for it. Freedom of speech & all that, right?

While EMC Outdoor is free to choose what billboard messages they present or do not, I just feel that the decision was unfair, that’s all. My two cents. 

Tyler

They needed all of the available billboards to advertise the Ark Encounter.

Reading over that email now I realize how casual and non-professional it sounds. Whatever. I wrote it on my phone early on a Sunday am.

I was very disappointed to hear that you rejected the CFI billboard as
“too controversial”. I would be suprised to hear of a more harmless
message that could be put on a billboard.

It seems like, where non-believers are concerned, no message is harmless
enough. Even saying we exist can be deemed “offensive” and “controversial”.

I think you need to take a good look at your policy and reconsider.

Here’s a copy of what I just sent…

I am writing to you in regards to your recent decision to reject the
billboard from Livingwithoutreligion.com claiming it’s “too offensive to
a large percentage of Knoxville residents.”. As a Knoxvillian, I do not
understand your argument. First of all, must all billboards in
Knoxville be in agreement with the “majority” of people in Knoxville?
That said, I would like to point out the Adult Superstore billboards
that litter the highways.  I personally do not like these messages and
would stick my neck out and say the majority of Knoxvillians wouldn’t
condone them as well. But then again, how could I prove that? That said,
what proof are you utilizing to make your determination? Is this a
personal belief? If so, I would contend that there will be many beliefs
and thoughts on the subject. Different points of view are what expand
our minds and open our thoughts to new and different ideas and concepts,
even when we do not initially agree with them as that usually comes
hand in hand with ignorance. What our beautiful city needs is to be
educated on what other beliefs are out their versus Christianity that
currently is advertised just about everywhere you look in our city. I
personally, find that offensive as no other sides or perspectives are
represented.

Second, I am thoroughly confused how the message “You don’t need God — to hope, to care, to love, to live.”  is
what you deem as offensive? Can you please further expand upon that? If
I were an Atheist or Agnostic would I then not be welcome in Knoxville
because I am too offensive for what you’ve determined is the majority?
Do you think all Christians are truly that close minded and labeling
them as well? Now that, I find offensive.

I am asking you to rethink your decision on this billboard. As I
think it would make an excellent point of discussion for our residents,
and open our minds to new perspectives. Furthermore, this billboard may
give support to those who do not believe in what your “majority” do,
allowing their voices to be heard and represented. As last I checked,
our country laws permit Freedom of Speech, for a reason.

Kindly,
Mary Barth

–remember that at that time you were seperate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without HOPE and without God in the world.”  http://atheistlegitimacy.blogspot.com/

From their point of view that is exactly right.

Which is exactly why we can’t let them boss us around, because what it does in reality is deny dissenters their speech.

I’d guess that a pro God billboard with a Muslim message like “Allahu Akbar” (God is great) would be rejected as well.

If you pay the $, they should let you put up the billboard.  But, let me ask a more important questions:

If there is no God, then what is “love?” What does it mean to “care?” Who decides what these terms mean unless there is a moral imperative and an absolute truth/standard to judge good/evil and right/wrong and caring/uncaring?   

Funny, social mammals seem to handle these problems just fine without a god theory. Does my cat Hypatia need to believe in a god to justify her desire to rub up against me and solicit my petting?

*yawn* Yet another Bible thumper.

My message:To whom it may concern: I am curious as to why the CFI “Living Without Religion” billboard was rejected. The billboard is not claiming that any religious group is wrong or bad, simply that it is possible to live an acceptable life without believing in any god. If you have ever allowed a religious message to be portrayed on one of your billboards, then this is blatant discrimination. I urge you to reconsider your decision and allow the CFI billboards to be placed up. Quite frankly, if seeing a sign that says “Atheists are okay” is enough to drive the residents of Knoxville insane with rage, perhaps they need to be educated in tolerance…something this billboard will do.Thank you.

Why, pray tell, does the existence of a deity do anything to invest “love,” “care,” “a moral imperative,” or “an absolute truth/standard to judge” anything in particular with meaning?

You seem to be laboring under some rather basic illogic.

Fair enough. It’s an honest (and likely correct) answer to Hemant’s question: the billboard is offensive to people because of those people’s serious atheophobia.

That’s why I never get either. Theists claim that their god somehow gave us morals, but it certainly can’t be in the form of his holy book, since that’s immoral in large parts. And an innate morality imparted by a god would be indistinguishable from one that evolved naturally.

Sure—but even more fundamentally, the Euthyphro dilemma blows a big hole in the foundation of what I gather bk believes.

Sorry my post above has so many empty lines: I wrote it in MS Word and pasted it in, and it didn’t have so much dead space until it posted on this blog. Sorry.

Meanwhile, perhaps a tactic with all of these local stories could be to have a group of us who would make sure that local media outlets are informed about these issues (e.g. writing/calling local news groups every time there is a local violation of church-state separation, discrimination against nonbelievers, etc.).

Is there a lawsuit in here anywhere?

I agree! I also think it feeds into Christians’ sense of self-importance when atheists go around talking about “God.” It allows them to continue to believe that their deity is special. Of course we know that atheists lack belief in all gods equally, but that’s not the message that Christians are taking from these billboards. They’ll just continue to think that their god is so important that even atheists address it specifically.

 This is why I hate Canada, even our Evangelicals are too damn reasonable, nice and moderate. 😛 I couldn’t have said it any better than “We’re all in this together, and from where I stand, I want to treat others the way I would want to be treated” though, an Internet high five to you sir. Truly, you are a gentleman and a scholar.

EMC Outdoor,I am writing to express my dismay that you have refused to run the center for inquiry’s billboard because it is, “too offensive to a large percentage of Knoxville residents.”  I find your reasoning questionable.  First off, as an English teacher looking through your other billboards, I immediately notice the text-speak of “Un-limit’d” and “Find the one that’s perfect 4U”.  Both offend my sense of grammar.  I note you take political ads, almost sure to offend the opposing political party.But most interesting, I note in your mall advertising section, an advertisement for Alpha USA.  Alpha USA describes themselves as “The Alpha Course is a practical introduction to the Christian faith, a place where guests have an opportunity to explore the meaning of life in a relaxed, friendly setting. ”   This seems to be setting up a clear practice wherein you allow Christian advertisements, but not those of other religions. This is highly troubling, not in the least from a legal standpoint.I would strongly ask that you reconsider your decision to ban Atheist billboards while allowing Christian ads to use your services.Regards,Dan Hendrickscc: Knox News, Knoxville Daily Sun, Knoxville Times

Bah – too slow to edit.  No religion has a majority of of followers. 

Dang copy and paste removed the spacing, at least the email looked proper 🙂

I don’t trust anyone who needs a god in order to define morality. If you are only good because you fear the wrath of an omnipotent being, then you really aren’t good.

True morality comes from the ability to empathize with your fellow human beings: You don’t do bad stuff because you know that it hurts them.

I agree wholeheartedly.  It give the Christian “superman in the sky” much more credibility than it deserves – which is to say no more than any other mythical being. I happen to know Christians who actually believe that everyone else “knows” that Christianity is true and that their “superman” knocked up a virgin in order to give “birth” to himself so that he could have himself tortured and killed as a sacrifice to himself to “forgive” humanity for something he(according to their beliefs) was actually responsible for himself. The Christians who hold that “everybody really knows it’s true” believe that everyone who believes in a different religion or no religion at all just don’t want to “obey God”. How do I know this? I’ve had many of them tell me so. They’ve been so indoctrinated since birth that it’s nearly impossible for them to truly understand that everyone DOESN’T believe what they believe.

Phrasing and capitalization such as that on the billboard only reinforces this belief and should be avoided at all costs. It’s time that the “I know better than everybody else and I’m better than everybody else because of it.” learn better.

There’s a Christian church, bookstore, gift shop, etc. on practically every street corner in Knoxville. I don’t see them being in any way picketed or protested by the Muslims, the Jews, the Amish, the Wiccans or the atheists that are here. The same goes for the radio shows and television shows that inundate the airwaves. Nor do we see any group other than the Christians spewing persecution and hatred toward any and everyone that doesn’t believe what they believe. Nor do we see any other group trying to shut everyone else up so that only their voice can be heard.

I wonder how they would feel if we put the shoe on the other foot?

This is what I actually sent EMC:

EMC,

You are, of
course, free to accept or reject any advertising you choose. However, think
about this:

There’s a Christian church, bookstore, gift shop, etc. on
practically every street corner in Knoxville.
I don’t see them being in any way picketed or protested by the Muslims, the
Jews, the Amish, the Wiccans or the atheists that are here. The same goes for
the radio shows and television shows that inundate the airwaves. Nor do we see
any group other than the Christians spewing persecution and hatred toward any
and everyone that doesn’t believe what they believe. Nor do we see any other
group trying to shut everyone else up so that only their voice can be heard.

What you are doing is exactly at odds with what your “good
book” supposedly teaches. What happened to tolerance, understanding and love?

Think about it.

Jeff Irick – Free thinker and proud of it.

Brin,

I hear where your coming from. I’ve been persecuted many times and even suspect(though I can’t prove it) that I’ve lost a job or two by proclaiming myself a free thinker instead of allowing myself to be mentally and emotionally enslaved by what, to me, is obviously left over mythology from a time in Man’s
when we didn’t know any better. I stand up and fight on anyway. Take a look at the Holocaust to see where this is headed if we don’t. We’ve already had one President openly proclaim that he didn’t believe that atheists should be allowed to be American citizens. In case you don’t know who I’m talking about, he’s the father of another President we had recently.

Here’s my email to them:

I don’t find anything ‘controversial’ about the atheist billboard
proposed in Knoxville, TN. I, and many others would like to know what
your company finds so ‘bad’ about this. The sign is a simple, positive
message that communicates to people that god is not required to be good.
It is not an attack on religion, not making a negative statement, or
offensive in any other way.

  Now, a billboard with Deuteronomy 13:6-10 or Exodus 35:2 can be
offensive as they promote murder. Please keep that in mind, and I’ll be
waiting for a response containing an explanation for your rejection.

Thank you,

Let’s hope they respond (I doubt it)…

I live in Knoxville, and cannot say I am surprised.   We are inundated with church billboards, anti-abortion billboards, God’s warning – “Don’t make mecome down there” billboards, etc.  I do not know if any of these are EMC Outdoors or not.  Lamar seems to be the big player in the billboard business here.

This is what I wrote to EMC Outdoor:

I notice that EMC Outdoor has rejected a billboard by the Center for Inquiry as “too controversial.”

There is nothing controversial about the Center for Inquiry billboard. 
It is the truth.  Many people do hope, care, love, and live every day
without God.

Real controversy is refusing
business due to expected, not actual, pressure from a religious
majority.  Even if such pressure would be forthcoming, it does not mean
that the billboard’s contents are controversial.  It means that some
people are too closed-minded to allow any thought with which they
disagree to be expressed.  That goes against the ideals on which this
country was built.

Please rethink your decision and allow the Center for Inquiry to purchase their billboard space.

Erp,

I hear where you’re coming from but a few simple examples will suffice to clarify my position. First, the best dating of the earliest gospel in the bible is 70 CE. The others are much newer. There’s no way that any of the authors knew the man even if he did exist. In fact, Paul is responsible for Christianity as we know it and, according to his gospel, he never met Jesus but instead saw it all in a vision. Secondly, there are no records from the time of his supposed existence that make any mention of him or his disciples or any of the of supposed well observed occurences(such as the dead rising). In addition, no records of the time make any mention whatsoever of Nazareth. They mention all sorts of places around where it was supposed to be but not of it. In fact, historical records indicate that the site that it was supposed to be located on was in fact, at the time, a system of caves used as a graveyard. There is a town called Nazareth now but historical records show that it was constructed probably some time in the 2nd century CE.

In addition there is some seriously screwed up geography going on there. The place where he supposedly cast the the demons into the swine and they ran down the hill and drowned themselves in the sea is around 200 miles from the sea. That’s a hell of a run and a hell of a hill. 🙂

As far as the story having had to start somewhere, I agree. However, we have stories of Odin, Thor, Zeus, Apollo, etc. The same is true in pretty much every culture. The fact that the stories exist in no way means they were inspired by an actual being. Somewhat reminiscent of old Paul and his vision, no?

Now, I’m not flat out insisting that Jesus never existed. I wasn’t there, I have no way of knowing for sure. All I’m saying is that the available evidence is overwhelmingly against it.

There are only three sources from years of  yore that make mention of Jesus and all three were not only written long after the time he supposedly existed but all three have been discredited by scholars centuries ago as being interpolations of existing works or outright forgeries. That doesn’t leave much to go on.

I completely agree with Some Lady.  The continued use of “God” instead of “gods” in atheist ads implies that it exists, and it keeps reinforcing the locals’ sense of privilege instead of challenging it. It inadvertently gives the Christian god a status above other gods it does not deserve. “God” belongs in the same category as Zeus, Ra, Shiva, Thor and all the rest. They’re gods.

You don’t need to believe in gods–
to hope, to care, to love, to live.

Christians would still pretend to be “offended,” but they’d have to work harder at justifying it, and they’d look more absurd trying.

AA,

Ya got it in one. 🙂

gski,

Note that I’m not accusing you of anything. I didn’t mean for the post to sound as if I were. I was merely trying to underscore the type of thinking that religion can engender and what the results of that can be. I tried to edit the post but I can’t find any way of doing that.

Good points, erp. One of the major problems we have in determining exactly what may or may not have taken place in antiquity  is the practice of writing a document and putting someone else’s name on it to give it more “authority”. That really screws up the academic works.

I agree wholeheartedly about the story building aspect of things. My own Irish ancestors were notorious for doing that. Sometimes it was an embellishment that grew over the years and the person actually existed, sometimes it was pure myth. After a few thousand years of tradition and no reliable evidence either way it’s pretty much impossible to discern the truth of the matter.

As far as James goes, it doesn’t necessarily mean any kind of familial relation. As far as something existing before Paul, there’s no doubt of that. If the man existed(and in this case I think he did), according to the writings he started out as Saul of Tarsus persecuting the Christians. That would be hard to do if some sort of sect didn’t exist. As far as the brother issue goes, it’s common for Christians to call each other Brother and Sister. I’m not saying that was the case, just that it would have been in character. so the appellation is really inconclusive.

Now Joseph – that’s a good one. I liken him to L. Ron Hubbard and Scientology. He made all that shit up. And, yeah, it’s a problem for the Mormons. 🙂

As far as Nazareth goes, like I said, historical information indicates that the area was a graveyard. It wouldn’t be in any way surprising to find shards of pottery there. Ancient funerary practices and all that, you know. At any rate, if it was a graveyard, no Jew would have lived there. Come to think of it, people still don’t tend to take up residence in graveyards.

Anyway, good discussion. I’m off here for the night. It’s getting late and I’m about bushed.

Have a good one.

are you suggesting you and your cat have the same conscience ability to reason, care, love, and create?  

can we all agree that the capacity of humans far out-distances any other species?   if so, why?  why does the human race differ so dramatically from any other species?and, I will ask again, can someone define “good” without a moral absolute?  if you don’t believe the moral absolute comes from a divine being, than okay, that is cool. Where does the moral imperative come from then?

So morals change and we all get to decide what is moral and what isn’t? 

For some cultures then it is perfectly moral to practice infanticide. Most, of course, are repulsed by this but for some cultures, this is a perfectly “moral” act in their context.  

Doesn’t there have to be a moral constant that applies regardless of what the “society decides?”   I don’t know about you, but I don’t trust that society can always get this right.  

Thanks Drew…  Where did I suggest that I am “only good” because I fear the wrath of an omnipotent being? 

I said this in a response to Stev84:  For some cultures then it is perfectly moral to practice infanticide. Most, of course, are repulsed by this but for some cultures, this is a perfectly “moral” act in their context.  

Doesn’t there have to be a moral constant that applies regardless of what the “society decides?”   I don’t know about you, but I don’t trust that society can always get this right.

While “The X of the Future” trope has fallen out of fashion in our culture, as Neil DeGrasse Tyson recently complained in another context, I’d like to see atheist groups which put up these billboards to start framing atheism as something futuristic; learn about “iAtheism” now to get ahead of the game. I don’t mean that we should wear jumpsuits and unitards, of course, but we could emphasize that religion characterized the past, and it just doesn’t seem to fit in the 21st Century despite efforts to “modernize” it. Perhaps we could even replace ” the New Atheism” with “the New Normal.”

My apologies. I inferred that you cannot define Love or Care without a divine being setting some sort of arbitrary “moral imperative.” And from there I deduced that you require a god and all its trappings in order to be good.

I stand by what I said even if it is not true about you. If there should be a moral constant, it should not come from some bronze age document and the people who follow it blindly.

Let’s take your infanticide-happy cultures (for which you failed to provide a cite), for example. My first assumption is that this does not occur in and first or second world countries. I would ask, why do they practice it? Are the infants they killed disabled in some way and they would be a burden on an already poor tribe? Are they just starving and the child will only grow up in misery? Do you honestly believe that raising a child in either circumstance is the moral thing to do? Of course, this is pure speculation because I have no freaking clue what the context is. Got a cite for these cultures? If they do it for reasons such as having the wrong color eyes, I’ll agree that it is wrong.

Nothing sickens me more when someone in a position of privilege acts as some sort of morality defender in cultures outside his own – not that I’ve inferred this about you.  A global moral constant would be incredibly stupid.
I’ll take my bets on society’s moral standards any day of the week.

Pretty sure he’s equating infanticide with abortion.

Sigh… parallelamania of dying and rising gods is dead in mainstream scholarship… though it rears it’s head on atheist websites all too frequently.

The idea that Christianity ‘borrowed’ from egyptian mythology is not held by any mainstream historian that I know of – it was rejected some decades ago, largely because the methodology which supported the theory was shown to be seriously flawed: take the Christian language of resurrection, call something else by the same name and ‘woah’ they must have borrowed it! In any case, Horus didn’t die, so how does that ‘exactly parallel’? Not exactly a good start, is it?

You’re reading way too much into my comment.

Of course, there is such a thing as a true scotsman – someone with a scottish citizenship. Just because I have red hair and a scottish rugby jersey and can mimick the accent and like to call myself scottish doesn’t make me Scottish. Likewise, there IS a criteria for being a Christian: following Christ, who, as it happened, said that people will say things you find offensive – get over it.
When I say ‘cultural Christian’ I mean those who want to keep the cultural tradition of Christianity without actually following Jesus. There’s plenty around – you don’t generally find them in church except maybe at Christmas, Easter or to get their baby christened. 
That is not to say that there aren’t “passionate bible-believing Christians” who, like you say, want to silence opposition. I’m simply speaking from my experience.

Missed the contact info on the first read. got it now.

Sorry to cut in, but as someone that has actually found it happen to my family’s cat, I feel I can give an answer: the dog came and fetched me to help the cat. You’re making a false assumption there that the dog wouldn’t do anything.

Now granted, had the cat not been part of our ‘pack’, the dog may not have fetched me. But all that means is that there may be a difference in what we as humans consider our ‘pack’ and what animals consider their ‘pack’.

In fact – and I’m aware this is going to be only an anecdote – I think you’re severely underestimating our animal cousins.

My mother is an epileptic and took our two dogs for a walk. The furthest point from our house, she had a seizure. One dog stayed with her to guard her, and the other ran back to get me and my father. The dog that came back to get us insisted that we followed her until we found my mother.

Like I said, only an anecdote – but still, you might find it surprising.

an excellent point you made about the adverts for the adult stores.

So if we somehow know all moral absolutes, why was it acceptable for those cultures to violate them? Of course the Christian response to that is some nonsense about free will. Which, even if it were true, negates the whole purpose. So god somehow puts this “moral constant” into our heads and then allows us to ignore it? Either shows that god is stupid or capricious. In any case, it’s wishful thinking

If there are moral absolutes and we don’t know about them, but just do our own thing, then the concept is irrelevant. We might as well make up your own stuff as we go along. Which is exactly what we do.

Here is what Richard Dawkins has to say about the topic (you know it’s over when the glasses come off):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dxdgCxK4VUA

Thanks for the guesses, but no, that’s not what I was talking about.  India, China and Uganda are major examples where female infanticide has been practiced in the past 20 years.  A quick google search will provide plenty of evidence of cultures who have or do practice infanticide.  

I’m trying to imagine an adult superstore.  I keep getting pictures of those retail parks with the large chains in warehouse like buildings, and one that has rows of shelves with sex toys on.

I live half an hour outside of Knoxville.  I think the really sad part about the billboard controversy is that ads are going up in all of these other places, but not here.  It makes us seem like a cultural backwater, when in some ways Knoxville is really progressive.  Most of my friends are skeptics or non-Christians, and those who are Christians tend to be very liberal and accepting.  If enough of us got together, we could represent exactly how major the ‘majority’ is a little better.  There’s a deep divide here, though.  A few years ago someone came in to the local Unitarian Universalist congregation during a children’s play and shot and killed several people, because of the church’s ‘liberality.’  Maybe that’s what has the EMC on edge, I don’t know.

You’re of course right that Christians shouldn’t be offended. I think the posters above mean that Christians often ignore their own faith and beliefs when confronted with a message they don’t believe in. It incites fear and criticism in their hearts. I know this is a gross generalization, but it is still common nonetheless. I don’t expect all Christians to be so high-handed, but I certainly don’t expect most of them to be accepting of this message of ‘otherness’ either.

You’re right, Annette. It was late and I was tired. “Exactly” is too blanket a statement to use. What would have been more correct to say is that the Horus story was rewritten and wrapped in Jewish trappings. The major elements are all there, though. There are also a lot of parallelisms to the story of Mithras. I think that major elements were taken from both and likely other    “Mystery School” religions and traditions as well.

ell.

I didn’t realize how often that one comes up.

All the  time, unfortunately, and not just by Christians. Look at all the moderate Muslims who proclaim that various suicide bombers weren’t “real” Muslims, because of course “real” Muslims wouldn’t do something like that.

You right, it indirectly denies the existence of god. In my opinion this is a mistake, we need billboards that state, unequivocally that gods were invented to make shamans rich and powerful and have no external existence!

Having been invented as a thought experiment, they must therefore exist in the imaginations of the shamans’ followers.
For atheists there is no god and still they breath. Amazing! 
Let us all stop pussyfooting.

My cat has a better sense of ethics and more compassion than 99% of  Christians.

Just look at the bigoted, hateful and STUPID assertions you’re pulling out of your nether regions to justify believing the delusion that a genocidal scumbag tyrant of a deity is real.

You’re a repulsive excuse of a human being.

Its totally correct,everyone has right to say about every religion.

Tyler, you claim to be an evangelical youth pastor but your thought are not a bit of a person who knows his Bible. Christianity is  a choice, yet your permissive thought toward “get lost because you are already lost ” got my attention that in Canada we have youth pastors who are ignorant of God’s Message than the third world Christians.
Praise the Lord your pastor is not my pastor.

Glry2hm48 your comment makes no sense to me. Could you rephrase it, put a period in some of the sentences and then…. maybe….maybe… I could understand what you’re trying to say?