A Free God Association sponsored an advertising campaign on public transit in Calgary using the slogan, “There’s probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life.”
A Muslim leader replied with a public transit campaign of his own: “God cares for everyone even for those who say He doesn’t exist.” He also directed people to his website where they can add their voice to the debate – www.godexists.ca
The Atheist campaign has run on 10 buses in Calgary and on public transit in Toronto. Several cities, including Halifax, Vancouver, Kelowna and London, Ont., have refused to run the ads. By the way, is that an infringement on free speech?
The atheist group hopes to have its ads in Ottawa at the beginning of May and their next stop will be the Maritimes.
Do you think the existence of God should be debated on public transit?
Do you think some cities should have refused to run the atheist ads?
I would think that if God woud be in business he would thank these people that say He does not exist for the advertisement. It is not so important that the ads are favorable but usually it is important that issues are talked about.
Why would anyone even want to talk about if they absolutely believe that He does not exist?
Have a beautiful spring day all of you!
No, I don’t think any city transit authority should have refused to run the ads. And, yes, that is an infringement on free speech.
Should the existance of God be debated on public transport? I suppose that would be up to the people on public transport. If that’s what they want to discuss, who’s to stop them?
I’ve always thought that atheists’ questions and doubts were the genuine probing of seekers, those who truly want to know God. I really enjoyed Bill Maher’s movie “Religulous” which asks all the right kinds of questions that a sincere seeker asks who wants to know a deeper truth.
Tony thanks for the dedication to your father. Very moving. There is an old Greek saying “a father can take care of nine sons but nine sons cannot take care of their father.” This, obviously does not apply to you.
Now onto God – What would the bus company suits have to say or do to pacifiy the “Thumpers” who refused to get on a bus that’s on the road to Hell because of the anti-God advertisement. The name of the Association looks like an oxymoron to me. First they say Free God and then they say there is no God. However, I need these people. They are the only measure I have around for me to say that I’m not nuts.
“Several cities, including Halifax, Vancouver, Kelowna and London, Ont., have refused to run the ads.”
It’s not the cities that are refusing to run the ads, Neil. At least, not in the case of Vancouver. It’s either the transit company or the company with the contract to provide the ads.
In the case of Vancouver, it’s Jimmy Pattison who’s the roadblock. He owns the ad space on buses as well as all the bus shelters where the ads might be placed. He said no, so no ads are allowed.
“Do you think the existence of God should be debated on public transit?”
Why not?
We still, I guess, live in a free country. Atheists are free to advertise where they want. Others are free to refuse to carry the message. Governements have to remain neutral and publicly owned transit authorities should not refuse to carry the ads; privately owned companies, on the other hand, can express their freedom of expression by refusing the ads. Freedom is for everybody…not just the minorities.
“God cares for everyone even for those who say He doesn’t exist”.
Hello! Am I in the wrong religion or not. These are the words of wisdom I would like to hear from my Pope on the Rope.
Hey, Joe you lucky guy. You have the best to two worlds, believe it or not God cares for you.
God is Great.
Heidi: “Why would anyone even want to talk about if they absolutely believe that He does not exist?”
Not this old canard…
There are many things the humanist association wants to accomplish – and the biggest goal is providing a community for atheists to belong to. I don’t need this (personally) but there are lots of atheists out there that are scared to profess their beliefs because they think they’re alone in their thinking. By advertising on buses they are providing these closeted atheists with a support group of sorts. A feeling that being an atheist doesn’t mean living on the outskirts of society – believe it or not it can be quite a stressful experience to admit to atheism… some religious folk can be quite nasty if they find out you don’t believe in god.
And while it’s not such a problem here (yet) the religious folk in England and USA do everything they can to get religion into science classes (biology, geology, astronomy etc)… and this requires a SOLID response from level headed people. This cannot be allowed to happen.
Hell – our science minister in canada is a bible thumper that doesn’t even understand basic science!! That’s scary as hell to me!
I don’t believe in god – but when believers (religious folks) bring their religion into public life I have every right to stop that which I don’t agree with.
“I have every right to stop that which I don’t agree with”??? You have every right to say you do not agree, in every way you wish, sky writing if you can afford it. Stop it? That would be censoring the people who disagree with you. I oppose censorship from whatever source. But I’m sure that is not what you meant.
Paul, you need to accept the qualifier Joe put in there: “… but when believers (religious folks) bring their religion into public life…”
He’s not talking about the private and personal thoughts and feelings of individuals. He’s talking about schools, government services, and other taxpayer-funded institutions in which religion specifically has no place. That’s not censorship. That’s the law, I think.
Chimera “He’s talking about schools, government services and other taxpayer funded institutions. I think there are by far more religious people funding these services. Therefore, don’t use taxpayers money to defend your or Joes’ argument.
Peter: “I think there are by far more religious people funding these services”
So? Chimera was right about what I meant (as Paul seems/seemed to understand) that it’s not censorship I favour, but it’s keeping religious influence out of gov’t/schools/public life. It has no place in public life since there is no SINGLE religion that all canadians subscribe to. Religion – like belonging to the cub scouts of canada – should be a personal thing.
That the majority of the taxpaying public believe in some form of god does not mean (for instance) that creationism should be taught in science classrooms…. and I will do everything in my power to stop it. I don’t want creationists censored though – hell, the more they talk the dumber they sound and the more obvious it becomes that creationism is NOT science!
“don’t use taxpayers money to defend your or Joes’ argument.”
Huh? What “taxpayers money” are we using?
Hi, good post. I have been pondering this issue,so thanks for writing. I will definitely be coming back to your blog.