Atheist Family Ad Rejected by Texas Movie Theater… Again April 6, 2012

Atheist Family Ad Rejected by Texas Movie Theater… Again

By Hemant Mehta
April 6, 2012

Remember how the Dallas–Fort Worth Coalition of Reason started an advertising campaign called “Our Families Are Great Without Religion”?

Remember how they wanted to place this ad in movie theaters to run before the showing of films?

Remember how the Green Oaks Movie Tavern in Arlington said they *would not* run the ad?

Remember how the Angelika Film Center in Plano stepped in and said they *would* run the ad?

Now, they’ve changed their mind due to complaints from Christians. Because I guess the sight of happy, diverse atheist families is too much for some of them to bear…

DFW-CoR coordinator Zach Moore writes:

I’ve just been called by a rep for the Angelika Plano, and it seems that in the face of complaints from Christian customers, they’re canceling our contract. Please direct your complaints to 972-943-1300 and ask for the manager!

Yes to that. Please call them and find out what’s going on and why the theater is caving in to the baseless complaints. (Honestly, what’s so offensive about that ad?!)

***Update***: Zach adds in an email:

The rep called me this morning and said that the Angelika Plano had received complaints from people who saw the Observer blog post. So they canceled our contract, which was signed on Wednesday.

Unlike the Movie Tavern, the Angelika isn’t making any claim to having a policy against religious advertising. In fact, my understanding is that they currently allow area churches to advertise in the very theater for which we were under contract. They simply caved to the anti-atheist bigotry, plain and simple.

***Update 2***: Reader plutoanimus adds:

I just spoke the the manager of the Angelika Film Center, and he said the decision was made at the corporate level.

He gave me the following number for voicing complaints… (213) 235-2222.

The corporate offices may be closed until Monday, just FYI.

Previous Post
At Christian Conference, Boys Must Use the Escalators
Next Post
A Clever Alabama License Plate
"Not fucking children would cut down on the number of "illegitimate" births."
Tawreos
A Pastor Who Raped and Impregnated ..."
"OK Smarty Pants. I defy you to distinguish rape culture from christian privilege"
Tawreos
A Pastor Who Raped and Impregnated ..."
"A man of god means that he has "Fuck You" money straight from the rubes ..."
Tawreos
A Pastor Who Raped and Impregnated ..."
"But that could mess up his career and no one wans that, especially not over ..."
Tawreos
A Pastor Who Raped and Impregnated ..."
Browse Our Archives
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment

  • So, Christians are allowed to have ads, but we aren’t. And if one does get put up on say a billboard, vandalizing it is a good idea because it might be illegal, but God says it’s okay, so nothing’s wrong here. #christianlogic #hashtagseventhoughwe’renotontwitterisawesome

  • Mack

    I would think that a business can sell add space to whoever it wants to. It’s their add space to sell. Just like I can sell a used car to whoever I would like to. There’s no law governing either one that I know of. So….what’s the complaint exactly? If they really needed the money, then they would sell that space. 

  • OverlappingMagisteria

    Not only is the ad inoffensive, but the atheist message would probably be missed by most people. The word “atheist” is only there in a very light font in the background, and unless you knew what DFWCOR stood for, you would have no idea what the ad is about. I doubt any self-righteous theist would even know that they are supposed to be offended by it.

  •  Most likely the interracial family to the left, I’m afraid.

  • digitalatheist

    as an ex-“christian” I can promise you that no matter how inoffensive or supportive and ad is, “god” fluffers are gonna whine, bitch, moan, gripe, compain, and “boycott” any group that supports or even dares shows those ads.

  •  The “up” side of this is that the local group can get publicity simply through the refusal–and doesn’t need to pay a dime now.

  • FrogKisser

    The local management at the Angelika Plano did not make the decision. The decision was made by someone at corporate. I was given the number 213-235-2222 to call for corporate.

  • I am getting so SICK of this!

  • Give the theater some credit for at least being honest about it.  As I wrote in the other thread, I even sort of understand where they (the theater, that is, not the offended jerkwads) are coming from here.  They’re virtually guaranteed to get angry customers demanding their money back because their family night out was ruined (by being forced to acknowledge that people they disagree with exist, GASP!).  

    In Plano, TX, of all places, this ad is going to be nothing but trouble any theater that accepts it.  You can make a powerful argument they should accept it anyway on principle… but at the same time, I can’t really work up too much rage against them as long as they own up to their cowardice (rather than trying to hide behind fictional “policies” that don’t get enforced in any other circumstances).

    As to the people who are all offended by this, of course… they can kiss my butt!

  • FrogKisser

     I called the corporate number, and it appears to go straight to a person’s office number, and the out of office message does not mention Angelika, so I’m not sure it’s the right number. Complaints can be submitted by email to http://angelikafilmcenter.com/contact_us.asp?hID=0&ID=&page=Contact%20Us#

  • Anonymous

    As with all of these events, the reaction to the ads proves the necessity of the ads. It’s offensive and unthinkable to publicly state your existence as an atheist and to suggest that one can be good and happy and fulfilled without belief in gods. We’re reviled and feared, and expected to shut our damn mouths and do nothing about.

  • I hate that you are probably right.

  • Mary

    I don’t think the movie theater is the problem. I can understand why they don’t want to take a little money for the ads if it is going to cost them a lot of money in ticket sales. It’s about the math. What really gets me is that Christians can be so awful. This is a picture of smiling families. Seriously? This is what you’re going to complain about? There isn’t even a gay couple pictured, at least not in this particular ad. Just imagine if there was one. You think it’s bad now. *argh* This makes me want to hit somebody, and I’m not normally violent!

  • Anonymous

     Yes, but isn’t the unilateral cancellation of a contract kind of illegal?

  • FSq

    The corporate person’s name is Terry. The person claiming to be the manager at the theater is named Chris – and he was a sour little prick.

    Terry’s number is 213.235.2222 – flood her VM with messages and call again on Monday.

    This is pure BS.

  • Chemoshbbq

    I took pictures the other day of the ads for superstition at Rave Theater in Northeast Mall and sent them to the DFW atheist.  My partner and I go all the time to the theater and just make hissing noises when they come on (we never talk during the movie ..just the damn superstition ads).   I totally support the theaters right to make money however they want too.  But if i find out that Rave is rejecting the ads I will let them know my weekly trips come to an end.  We spend several hundred dollars a month there.  Popcorn/3D tickets, cokes …we enjoy ourselves it is a day out.  But I will complain and stop going if the ads are rejected there.  I have not even called to ask them to stop running the ads for superstition ….YET. 

  • I think the number of Christians that would boycott the theater that might’ve gone to the theater would outweight whatever the ad might’ve cost.

  • One wonders why christians would not want to see such advertising. Do they feel threatened by it? Would they rather not have to consider relinquishing magical thinking?

  • With the caveat that when some networks cover it, it gets turned into an ad targeting children.

  • Depends on the terms of the contract.  They probably have an escape clause.

  • Anonymous

    “The society X reserves the right to cancel the contract whenever it wants” ? Around here that kind of clause is illegal too.

  • It can only be fear.  Atheists are finding each other, finding it’s ok, and finding their voice.  And many Christians find it threatening.  They have a lot invested in their belief system and normal human atheists challenge the notion that you have to have God, whether you believe in him or not.

    When religion is bad, it’s very very bad.  And when it’s good, it’s superfluous.

  •  For triple bonus points, you should have a hashtag that’s too long to fit in a tweet.

    Of course, then someone’ll set up a hashtag-shortener (hash.ly?), and you’ll only get double bonus points.

  • I was going to say the same thing. The interracial family is probably just as offensive to some as the word Atheist is. It’s a sad, sad world.

  • Of course it scares the Christians. It’s shown in theaters, where they take their kids, so it interferes with the indoctrination. Can’t have the kids asking questions, now can we?

    Or maybe they’re just scared of being confronted with their own doubts…

  • Yeah. Like others have said, this isn’t the theatre caving to bigotry, it’s the theatre caving to bigots who are threatening to boycott them. It’s a revenue decision. The ad dollars gained compared to the ticket and concession dollars potentially lost balanced out in favour of the bigots.

    Having said that, the Christians who complained are weak little self-entitled fucks.

  • I love this argument. It’s legal, so it’s perfectly fine and you see no problem with it. Doesn’t matter that it’s just plain wrong, and discriminatory. Nope, it’s legal, so it’s fine people… move along, nothing to see here.

  • Coyotenose

     You don’t know what the complaints are?

    The biggest one rhymes with “suppressing a minority on the basis of bigotry”, and ought to be obvious.

  • Clearly DFW needs an Alamo Drafthouse.

  • What’s weird is that Angelika is where they show a lot of foreign/artsy films, not the usual fare for your typical knee-jerk low-brow Christian, either…

  •  Hell to the YES on that one.  Alamo Rocks!!  I love our Alamo’s in Houston…

  • The weirdest thing about this is that Angelika is renowned for showing all manner of “Artsy”, foreign, otherwise weird and challenging films that might not sit well with the average Christian viewer if they actually paid attention to high-brow art…so disappointing that Angelika caved on this one…

  • Would you please send those photos to me directly? zach@dfwcor.org

  •  What I was think is would they cave to “pressure” if it were directed at race or… anything else this damned innocuous? It’s like, “sorry, but if we aren’t bigots, it’ll anger the bigots” isn’t an acceptable position imo.

  • IIRC, Discriminating on the basis of religion in a “public accommodation” (such as the selling of advertising space to the public) is illegal in all 50 states.

  • Ok. Then the atheists can *sue*, and make it a *different* revenue decision. 

  • Brad Watson

    I’m not inclined to phone the theater corporate management as this is their private property and can do with it as they please.  However, I would be willing to add my name to a list of atheists (delivered to their management) who will now forever boycott the Agelika theater.  By doing so, it would be my hope that they would adopt a new policy of no religion-based advertising, and then any theists advertising there would lose *their* advertising privilges as well.

  • BillboardFamily

    They showed the Darwin movie when it came out a few years ago and our group had a rather large meetup group there. We also watched the Prop 8 movie there. Seems those movies would turn off more christians than an ad that doesn’t explicitly mention religion. 

  • TheInterracialAtheistFamily

    Yes, we are very offensive driving around in our minivan along Texas highways =) 

  • Keulan

    These movie theaters are cowards for caving into the demands of the bigots.

  • LutherW

     I bet some of the movies are much more offensive than any of the Xtian ads. But that is OK, violence, killing, far from art.

  • Mack

    Aw yes, the morality of atheists rings true again with the wonderful curse words. So, how are you “good” without God again? There’s nothing “good” about name-calling or cursing is there?

  • That’s what I was thinking. They aren’t so upset over the godlessness of it as much as the “race traitor” with the “mulatto” baby…  It *IS* Texas, after all, even though I’m afraid that attitude is alive and flourishing in Indiana, too.

  • You really have an issue with the words people use.  You keep claiming that atheists are immoral because they use words you don’t like.

    I’ve often heard the argument that without a law giver, I can’t have morality.  If I don’t get my morals from God, then I have no moral compass.   That ‘logically’ I can do whatever I want and make up my own rules.

    And yet, that seems to be what you’re doing.  You’re rather arbitrarily deciding that certain words are immoral.  On this occasion you do say ‘name-calling’ but you also say ‘cursing’.  And you have complained about ‘cursing’ before, so I don’t think it’s just words directed at someone else that bothers you.  But let’s address both situations.

    Name calling: Are there some words that are ok to use, and other immoral?  Is it ok to call someone an idiot?  A nimrod?  Stupid?  Immoral?  Certainly we must have the right to express our negative opinions about others- you continually do it here.  So on what basis do you pick which words are immoral and which aren’t?  And in what way does your’re personal decision apply to us?  Can we decided that it’s immoral for you to use the ‘c’ word that you keep tossing around?

    Other uses:  I guess this is really the same thing.  You have, as far as I can tell, arbitrarily decided that some words are not only disagreeable or ill advised, but ‘immoral’.  Not that it would make it any less arbitrary, but are you even pulling that absolute morality from the Bible?  I’m unaware of the reference, unless it’s Exodus 21:7 and one of God’s names is ‘Fuck’.  So do you use the FCC to get your morality?  Is Bono immoral?  What about words from other languages?  Can I talk about the Mormon Tabernacle Choir without you telling me I’m immoral?  Or does it only count if I spit the last syllable?  Would it be immoral for me to call you a goat?  What if I did it in Russian?  What if I use created words from popular culture and just told you to frak off?

  • Coyotenose

     If curse words upset you more than bigots suppressing speech, that doesn’t speak ill of anyone here except yourself. You supported Silo Mowbray’s last sentence quite well.

  • Coyotenose

     No, private company. Unless they violate the contract, there is no recourse there.

  • Mack

    Why must one express a negative opinion of others and resort to name-calling? I would suppose you have the right to do so, but why do it? What gain is there to it? My biggest complaint how people can call someone else a name without even knowing or meeting them. 

    While I express my thoughts and am opposed to some of the agenda’s and arguments that are given at this site, I don’t call people names and certainly don’t cuss them out. I can be opposed to someone’s thoughts and still like them as a friend you see. I’m not saying that you can’t do that either. But I have read some people on here that cannot separate the two and would just as spit in my face just knowing that I am a Christian rather than to give me a chance and talk to me and find out who I am if we ever met.

    I try not to express negative opinions about people themselves. If I have done that than I apologize. That’s not my intent. I’m not sure when I have expressed a negative opinion of any one person specifically, but usually I express a negative opinion of one’s actions or life style. Again, separating that from the person.

    As far as what is okay and not okay language, I’m pretty certain there is no laundry list in the Bible of “potty words” that are off limits, but the following verses can be used as a guide:  Eph 4:29 is my favorite and a difficult standard to try an live by. 1 Peter 3:10 and James 3:9-12 are also nice verses. 

    If one wanted to use the FCC to get a list that’s okay too, but again, the Ephesians verse trumps the FCC, IMO. If you can tell me how cursing qualifies as wholesome speech then I’ll let up.

    What is one of the reasons why a child should not attend a rated R or PG-13 movie? Usually its because of language and violence with the occasional sex scene added in. Subtract the last two, and it can still be a rated R or PG-13 movie just based from foul language alone. Why do you think that is? Why is it that children at school get in trouble when they curse?

    Even without the rules of the Bible, cursing is still seen as an immoral act by society is it not? Is there a purpose to it besides the easy cop-out that I’ve head before to “express oneself”? If a person cannot express themselves in a situation without cursing then they need to go learn some new words or maybe take an anger management course if the cursing only comes out in moments or anger, pain or rage. Just a thought.

  • Mack

    And no…it would not matter if it was in Russian in not. Again, going back to the references I gave as being the standard. The Bible doesn’t care if you are demeaning in any particular language. Demeaning speech is still demeaning.

  • Tom

    If anything, looking at smiling atheist families probably makes it even worse for them than, say, angry atheists.  It makes the superfluity of a god to a fulfilling, happy life more apparent.

    “Puritanism: the haunting fear that someone, somewhere may be happy.”

  • Mack

    Check out the back part of Luke 6:45. THAT is what worries me the most about people’s speech.

  • Brother, I like what you’re saying here with the references and all, but yeah, you might have said some things about some people earlier. Just saying that posting things in online forums might not be the best idea for you 🙁

    We all make mistakes. It’s important to learn from them though my friend! 

  • Tom

    Would you object to a cannibal less if he used a knife and fork?

    Stop fussing about our choice of words and pay more attention to what we’re using them to say.

    You’ll notice that I said all of the above without once using words like, for example,  “fuck,” which may lead a prude like yourself to the erroneous conclusion that I don’t think nearly so little of you as if I had used them.  Be in no doubt, I do indeed have just such a low opinion of you but, realising you wouldn’t pay attention to anything else I said if I had included them earlier, I decided to save them until the end.  You shallow, superficial fuck. 

    (Question: which of those three things in that last sentence do you most dislike being called?  If you’ve got any wisdom, it won’t be “fuck,” for all that it’s the only “dirty” word there.)

  • Rwlawoffice

    Resorting to curse words to make a point just shows the lack of intelligence of the speaker. They have no intelligent argument to make so they resort to cursing and name calling to make up for it.  

  • One the other hand, if the only thing you can say about someone’s argument is that it includes some words you find objectionable, it could be you don’t have any substantial counter argument.

    I think some words are like salt and pepper.  You can’t live on salt and pepper alone, and too much can ruin a good meal, but just the right amount can make a bland dish stand out.

    If the the greatest harm I do (and I’m sure it’s not) is to occasionally use a word someone objects to, then trust me, I’m not going to lose any sleep over it.  I think there are much more important ways to measure a person’s goodness.

  • Perhaps we have a different understanding of the word ‘moral’.  I take immoral to be something that actually causes harm, or allows harm.  I don’t think “go away” is particularly harmful, nor is “fuck off”.  I do think context matters and there are occasions where either of those could be considered harmful, but a public online forum is hardly one of them.  None of us are going to cry ourselves to sleep because of a word someone else on here called us.

    I don’t think society even thinks swearing is immoral.  At most we recognize that it bothers some people so we have some restrictions on people being ‘forced’ to hear some words.  There is no penalty for saying any word, only for saying some words in such a way that other unsuspecting people may hear them when they don’t want to.

    However 

    I try not to express negative opinions about people themselves. If I have done that than I apologize. That’s not my intent. I’m not sure when I have expressed a negative opinion of any one person specifically, but usually I express a negative opinion of one’s actions or life style. Again, separating that from the person.

    You have stated that atheists are immoral and implied not good.  Based on simply the occasional word use.  Does saying ‘fuck’ erase everything else someone does?  All Bono’s charity work eradicated because he said “this is fuckin’ brilliant!”?  Seems a bit harsh. And I don’t recall it being to a person, other than a reply, but it has been directed at the group.  Feels to me like you’re saying that because some atheists swear that atheists can’t be good.I think there are more substantial measures of a person’s morality.

    Dawkins always quotes 
    Johann Hari  “I respect you as a person too much to respect your ridiculous beliefs.”  Kind of like expressing a negative opinion of the person’s actions or life style, not the person.

  • Coyotenose

    Garbage argument. It requires you to ignore the fact that points WERE made, and then cursing was added for flavor.

    Why do you have to be dishonest about that?

  • Coyotenose

     Oh gosh, let’s see. Luke 6:45….

    First, you’re trying to passive-aggressively insult us by implying that we’re evil and hateful for using curse words. Pretty scummy of you. Actually, according to Luke 6:45, YOUR attempt to imply things about us unsupported by evidence, solely in order to have an argument, says that there’s suspicion and evil in your heart.

    Second, very poor job of trying to change the subject there. Why are you being dishonest by evading the point: that bigots suppressing speech doesn’t seem to bother you?

  • Rwlawoffice

    Having to sort through curse words just to try and glean the point that was trying to be made certainly dilutes whatever argument is hidden under the garbage language.  I view it like a comedian that resorts to curse words for shock value and people think that is funny. A much smarter and wittier comedian doesn’t have to use that language. 

  • Whenever I have difficulty parsing something on here, it’s never because of the swearing.  I’m really tempted to elaborate, but in the spirit of sticking with what’s important and not getting side tracked I’ll just leave it at that.

  • Anonymous

    If anything, looking at smiling atheist families probably makes it even worse for them than, say, angry atheists. It makes the superfluity of a god to a fulfilling, happy life more apparent.

    You nailed it.

    Right there.

  • That seems a bit harsh Tom. Why do you have such a low opinion of someone you haven’t met? For me, THAT tells me more about what kind of a person you are than the language that you use. 

    I’m looking past your language and I see a person who actually thinks ill of someone for a belief. And you’re calling him shallow? This is of course based ONLY on your post. I’m sure you’re a great person and just trying to make a point….hopefully.

  • Possible on the first one. Very doubtful on the second one. 

  • Brad, do you even live in the area? I’m just curious. I could see a whole bunch of people saying that they will boycott them even though they live 1500 miles away. That would be kind of funny, but might injure any credibility that the petition would have. Now if 20% of the town signs the boycott, then you have something!

  • Tom

    If this were a thread aimed at children and not an adult discussion, you’d have a point about that film rating stuff.

    That we consider the exposure of children to certain adult material to be a bad thing does not make that material itself inherently bad under any other circumstances.

    Why should we express a negative opinion of others?  To let them know they’re being a jerk and need to do something about it.  Systems go unstable without negative feedback.  If you have a negative impression of someone, there are conceivable circumstances under which you’d be better off in the long run if you did express it.  Tactfully if you want.

    Perhaps the underlying reason we shelter children from extremes of expression and experience alike is simply that they’re too responsive at that age, and need attenuated feedback to prevent chaotic oscillation or overshooting or some other damaging system collapse.  Kids are often told never, ever to do stuff; then, as an adult, you realise a lot of things are actually just fine in moderation.  Kids are given a limited range of action and input because they suck at proportionally responding to input.

    You may also be interested to know that some interesting studies have been done linking profanity to pain relief; if it comes out during pain or rage, that could actually be quite healthy.

    Oh, and the bible’s also full of grubby language, plus a whole heaping lot of name-calling.  Take a look: http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/lang/long.html

  • Anonymous

    Good! I am glad it was rejected, that kind of garbage does not need to be seen anyways.

    http://www.Total-Privacy dot US

  • Yea, I’m sorry. Christians are the most despicable people ever. Sure, we may call Christians, as the above poster did, “weak little self-entitled fucks.” It’s Christians however, who hold the crux of vileness with 5 little words I hear time and time again:

    You’re going to Hell.

    That’s just even worse. You’re telling someone that they deserve infinite torture simply because they don’t believe the same things as you.

    So yea, name-calling or you deserve to suffer for eternity… which is worse… hmmm…

  • Anonymous

    Actually, there are laws saying who you may sell a used car to. If you are a business, you may choose, however, you may not treat different members of the same class differently. i.e., you can refuse to sell to one of your competitors, but then you must refuse to sell to ALL of your competitors.
    And of course, some classes are protected and not subject to choosing – e.g., sex, race, etc.

  • Anonymous

    The real problem is most of the xtians don’t even bother to read and understand their own mythology.
    The bible is pretty clear that you “perish” if you are not saved….i.e., you cease to be. There’s no eternal torture if you have perished. And hell is just a burning garbage pit outside the city. Lake of fire and all, it’s just another place to perish.

  • Rwlawoffice

    As a Christian I can assure you that orthodox Christianity does teach that if you are not saved you will spend eternity in hell.  We believe there is a soul that survives physical death.

    By the way, why call Christians xtians?  Is there a reason other then  to show disrespect?

  • Rwlawoffice

    As an atheist you believe that there is no life beyond this one, that there is no eternity correct?  So you contend that calling someone a name to degrade him in this life and harm him here is worse then expressing a belief that those that don’t believe in Christ will spend eternity in hell, which is a place that you don’t even think exists.  This is selective outrage just to justify calling people that don’t belief the same as you despicable. As a a Christian I would not call a Hindu despicable if he told be I would go to their version of hell, I just wouldn’t believe it. 

  • I think intent is far more important than the actual words used.  Even if I don’t believe in hell, a Christian telling me I’m going to go there is a statement of their opinion of me.  They (I assume) actually believe I deserve hell.  I know it’s always couched in “Just being honest” and “hey, it’s not me, it’s God”.

    I’m not sure you can make any blanket statements about what is better/worse.  It’s quite easy to say something that doesn’t seem like much of anything, and yet is a great offense to the other person.

  • Arthur Dent

    Texas sucks.

  • Rwlawoffice

    Rich if I was to tell you that as atheist I believe that you are going to spend eternity in hell I and most other Christians would be doing it out of love for you and a sincere desire to see you saved. I certainly agree that there are times when this same statement is made in hate and that is regrettable. On the other hand I can’t see how calling  someone “weak little self entitled f**ks” can be anything other than hateful.

  • Your God is monstrous. There is nothing, nothing, that we can do in our finite lives that deserves infinite punishment. That’s simply the most vile piece of theology that has ever been introduced in the history of religion.

    As per your question, it’s mostly for speed. X is “Chi” and has been a symbol of Christianity for millenia.

  • ”
     out of love ”

    Sometimes yes.  I’m not sure about ‘most’ but sure, > 0.

    ” statement is made in hate”

    Hate yes, but sometimes also the arrogant passive aggressive dismissive that you also get from atheists.  “I’m in on the real truth, and you’re just too dumb and want to do whatever you want without obeying God”.

    “hateful”

    Yes, it is.  Sometimes we get angry http://i.imgur.com/mpQA0.jpg

  • Rwlawoffice

    Thank you for the answer to my question. If you don’t believe that you have a soul, why do you worry about infinite punishment?  What does the length of time it takes to commit the offense effect the length of the punishment? If you are talking about the gravity of the offense and you understand the Christian theology to mean that not believing in Christ leads to eternal separation from God, then you know both the reason for the separation, the consequences of not preventing it  and the way to prevent it from occurring.  How is that not just? 

  • I don’t worry about eternal punishment. I think it’s vile that you do. I think it’s a vile theology, and I’ve said this many times already. Your beliefs lead to families who tell little children that they deserve punishment for eternity.

    As for justice, would you say a person who robs a convenience store should be sentenced to a life imprisonment? God’s punishment that you describe is even worse than that. How is that justice? How is that love? Your god is a monster. Your god is simply the most violent, monstrous, and hateful deity I can think of.

  • Rwlawoffice

    You really didn’t answer my question.  If you know the consequences and you engage in the behavior, how is it not just? And when God gives you a way out of that consequence to avoid the punishment you would otherwise deserve, how is that being a monster?

    The salvation from God is not based upon justice.  It is based upon unwarranted grace.  It is like a judge knowing that you robbed the convenience store and knowing that you deserve the sentence he lets you off because someone else has paid that sentence for you.

     I am curious why you are angry at a God that you don’t think exists?
     

  • SadieStChristopher

     The bible has plenty of filthy language in it , do you dismiss the whole of the bible because it references “pissing against the wall” and “dung eating” ?

    What do you think about the efforts of people to suppress atheist speech ?  You think that is just fine ?  You didn’t address that AT ALL, just the fact that someone who didn’t like people bullying atheists over their speech calling them a F—.  Seems to me by implication, you are supporting bullying atheists out of the right to express themselves.

    Seems to me the theater DID have a contract to run the ad, then they were bullied into breaking the contract.  You think breaking a contract is OK ?

  • Lance

     It would be the opposite if atheists outnumbered christian in the BIBLE BELT.

  • XMarkstheSpot

    SOME Christians.  Kindly don’t lump us all in with the panicked minority.  

  • XMarkstheSpot

    I thought you were an atheist?  

  • jamie

    Huh, funny that no Atheists complain while constant religious commercials are played everywhere we go! Christians, practice what you preach. 

error: Content is protected !!