NationStates Jolt Archive

Have any of you seen the "Foundation for a Better Life" stuff? They have billboards all over the place, and ads in many movies. They use these ads to promote integrity, honesty, determination, respect, etc.

My question is, how is this any different from religious prosletyzing? In most states a billboard saying: "Prayer...It's a good thing" would draw a storm of protest. If an ad before a movie said "Don't eat pork...It's unholy" people would freak. So why is an organization like "Foundation for a Better Life" allowed to do these sorts of things without protest?

As a secular amoralist I find many of these ads very offensive.

Schools are in on the act too, with posters advocating "respect" "academic honesty" and "self esteem". Should they be allowed to do this?

It's ok because it's not offending the people religous prosletyzing offends.

It's ok because it's not offending the people religous prosletyzing offends.

So much for equality.... :(

I think it has to do with what they promote. It's more or less common throughout all cultures that the values this organization promotes are encouraged and considered important to integration in to society. So, they aren't really trying to prosyletyze but are emphasizing concepts already held in high regard.

Its not like there saying go sacrifice a relative or something is it?

Its not like there saying go sacrifice a relative or something is it?
I think if they were I'd maybe be even less offended....

Morality is good. It makes people more likely to do things that help others or themselves and to build a better society and less likely to do the oposite.

Not eating porc or praying more, however, will have no such effect. On a whole, practicing theists are no more or less useful to their societies than nonpracticing theists and/or deists, agnostics, and athiests.

Try being a secular humanist in stead of a secular amoralist. You can keep the hedonism, but be less of a jerk :cool: . (not meant as an insult, please don't take it that way)

:rolleyes: Billboards can and do contain ads for Churches. Privately owned space can advertise whatever the hell they want, and if anyone doesn't like it, they can complain to the company that owns the space. If people make a big stink about it, they're asses that need better things to do. They're not Government owned. As for schools, does anyone really care if they advertise "respect" or "hang in there kitty" or whatever? Seems like someone is overly sensitive and/or needs a hobby.

I think it has to do with what they promote. It's more or less common throughout all cultures that the values this organization promotes are encouraged and considered important to integration in to society. So, they aren't really trying to prosyletyze but are emphasizing concepts already held in high regard.

While many of these concepts are common to world cultures, they're really only common to the small minority that writes the religious texts. Most people are dirty lying scheming bastards, and they really shouldn't stand for this sort of prosletyzing. Besides, even if it is majority opinion, that doesn't mean its right.

While many of these concepts are common to world cultures, they're really only common to the small minority that writes the religious texts. Most people are dirty lying scheming bastards, and they really shouldn't stand for this sort of prosletyzing. Besides, even if it is majority opinion, that doesn't mean its right.

Deal with it. As long as my dime isn't paying for it, I could give a flying f**k. One lying schemeing bastard has as much right to post their beliefs on private property as you do to post your beliefs here or in your "My Little Pony" diary.

While many of these concepts are common to world cultures, they're really only common to the small minority that writes the religious texts. Most people are dirty lying scheming bastards, and they really shouldn't stand for this sort of prosletyzing. Besides, even if it is majority opinion, that doesn't mean its right.

ZOMFG MORALITY IS EVIL CUZ IT REPRESSES PEOPLE WHO DON't beL:IEVE IN TEH EXSITANCE OF MROALITY!!!!111!!!1 LOL WTF!!! I AM A DIRTY LYING BASTARD AND YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO SAY THAT IS BAD!!!!!!!!11!!!!111!!

Morality is good. It makes people more likely to do things that help others or themselves and to build a better society and less likely to do the oposite.

Not eating porc or praying more, however, will have no such effect. On a whole, practicing theists are no more or less useful to their societies than nonpracticing theists and/or deists, agnostics, and athiests.

Try being a secular humanist in stead of a secular amoralist. You can keep the hedonism, but be less of a jerk :cool: . (not meant as an insult, please don't take it that way)

The issue is the whole "build a society" thing. That's not what everyone values, in fact most people deep down couldn't give a rat's ass about how "society" is doing. If the message was something like "serve the majority, you stupid (insert minority here)" people would be up in arms. Why don't they react to the same message when its just slightly camoflaged?

Anyway, I like being a jerk. ;)

Deal with it. As long as my dime isn't paying for it, I could give a flying f**k. One lying schemeing bastard has as much right to post their beliefs on private property as you do to post your beliefs here or in your "My Little Pony" diary.

And yet when someone does post billboards that say "evolution is wrong" or "Jesus is the only Lord" (and I'm talking about the big roadside ones, not ones on their lawns) people object. If you had to watch a "Join our Church" ad before watching Harry Potter, you would very likely give a flying fuck. So why are secular messages any different?

The issue is the whole "build a society" thing. That's not what everyone values, in fact most people deep down couldn't give a rat's ass about how "society" is doing. If the message was something like "serve the majority, you stupid (insert minority here)" people would be up in arms. Why don't they react to the same message when its just slightly camoflaged?

Anyway, I like being a jerk. ;)

I respect your right to be a jerk. Respect other people's rights to be jerks or, conversely, sanctimonious, overly righteous jerks. Why should you care. According to you, you're amoral anyway, so what otherpeople do and say shouldn't matter.

In fact, this whole thread makes no sense. If you're saying there's no right or wrong, then what do you care what other people do? It shouldn't matter to you one bit.

Or, to make it even more simple: Since you don't care, why do you care?

The issue is the whole "build a society" thing. That's not what everyone values, in fact most people deep down couldn't give a rat's ass about how "society" is doing. If the message was something like "serve the majority, you stupid (insert minority here)" people would be up in arms. Why don't they react to the same message when its just slightly camoflaged?

Anyway, I like being a jerk. ;)
People usually don't react the same because it's easier to not give a crap if it's hidden, even a teeeeeny little bit. If, as you suggest, somebody were to see that whole "Eat less pork" thing, they'd probably be a bit miffed more because it's so blatant (and ridiculous) than because some interest group tells them it's healthier to not eat so much pork. Heck, even the folks who will end up eating less pork will probably be going "Yeah, they really could've done that in a more subtle way".

On the same token, if I want to put up an inspirational poster in my workplace to keep the employees from rampaging and throwing scissors (both of which happen with alarming frequency, if no customers are present), that's my choice. They probably will roll their eyes and mock me for a day or two, but if I was to put up a sign that said "Be friggin happy" they'd get pissed. Or actually, knowing my co-workers, they'd laugh. But you get the idea.....it's all about subtlety.

And yet when someone does post billboards that say "evolution is wrong" or "Jesus is the only Lord" (and I'm talking about the big roadside ones, not ones on their lawns) people object. If you had to watch a "Join our Church" ad before watching Harry Potter, you would very likely give a flying fuck. So why are secular messages any different?

Yeah, some people object. People object to stuff all the time, mostly to hear themselves talk. But they can't do anything about it. Just like you can't do anything about the dumb Snoopy poster in school where Snoopy is wearing shades and the caption says "School is Cool."

Law only comes into it if the Government is pushing religion. Private citizens can do whatever the hell they like, as long as they don't break indecency laws.

Have any of you seen the "Foundation for a Better Life" stuff? They have billboards all over the place, and ads in many movies. They use these ads to promote integrity, honesty, determination, respect, etc.

My question is, how is this any different from religious prosletyzing? In most states a billboard saying: "Prayer...It's a good thing" would draw a storm of protest. If an ad before a movie said "Don't eat pork...It's unholy" people would freak. So why is an organization like "Foundation for a Better Life" allowed to do these sorts of things without protest?

As a secular amoralist I find many of these ads very offensive.

Schools are in on the act too, with posters advocating "respect" "academic honesty" and "self esteem". Should they be allowed to do this?
Simple they like everyone has the right to free speach (outside some small restrictions in this country such as advocating violence and or religous favoritism by the governent itself)


Outside of that religious people have the right to advertise as well as secular

But the right to free speach also includes our right to speek out against THEIR use of free speach

Just because you are alowed to say something does not mean you have the right to not be questioned and or publicly distained because of that view

Yeah, some people object. People object to stuff all the time, mostly to hear themselves talk. But they can't do anything about it. Just like you can't do anything about the dumb Snoopy poster in school where Snoopy is wearing shades and the caption says "School is Cool."

Law only comes into it if the Government is pushing religion. Private citizens can do whatever the hell they like, as long as they don't break indecency laws.

I'm realizing at this point that the question of the thread doesn't really apply to you. You're saying people shouldn't object to either, I'm saying that if people object to one (which they do) they should object to the other.

I'm realizing at this point that the question of the thread doesn't really apply to you. You're saying people shouldn't object to either, I'm saying that if people object to one (which they do) they should object to the other.

No, I'm saying that people do object. People object to silly, meaningless minutia all the time. Why should any of us care? For someone who is a self-proclaimed amoral person, you sure do spend a lot of time worrying about what other people are doing.

Simonist']People usually don't react the same because it's easier to not give a crap if it's hidden, even a teeeeeny little bit. If, as you suggest, somebody were to see that whole "Eat less pork" thing, they'd probably be a bit miffed more because it's so blatant (and ridiculous) than because some interest group tells them it's healthier to not eat so much pork. Heck, even the folks who will end up eating less pork will probably be going "Yeah, they really could've done that in a more subtle way".

On the same token, if I want to put up an inspirational poster in my workplace to keep the employees from rampaging and throwing scissors (both of which happen with alarming frequency, if no customers are present), that's my choice. They probably will roll their eyes and mock me for a day or two, but if I was to put up a sign that said "Be friggin happy" they'd get pissed. Or actually, knowing my co-workers, they'd laugh. But you get the idea.....it's all about subtlety.

So do motivational posters actually stop them from attacking eachother with scissors? Have you considered the demotivational variety (they're much more realisitic). Here's the site:http://www.despair.com

You can't make a reasonable argument about morality from an amoral standpoint. Convert your assertion into a question and you'll get proper results, otherwise we'll just mock you for being a hypocrite in addition to being a jerk.

And I'm sure people do object to the other, just as you are doing. Why should any of us care?

:rolleyes: By people I meant a bit more than teenagers on internet forums.

My question is, how is this any different from religious prosletyzing? In most states a billboard saying: "Prayer...It's a good thing" would draw a storm of protest.
No it wouldn't. I see those everywhere. The only thing that makes people mad is when the government does it.

I am a teenager. I post on forums. Ergo all people who post on forums are teenagers.

Spot the flaw in this argument....

:rolleyes: By people I meant a bit more than teenagers on internet forums.

Was that directed at me?

You can't make a reasonable argument about morality from an amoral standpoint. Convert your assertion into a question and you'll get proper results, otherwise we'll just mock you for being a hypocrite in addition to being a jerk.

I'm not making an argument about morality. I'm just saying that if people object to religious prosletyzing they should logically also object to secular prosletyzing on the same grounds, whatever those grounds may be.

I'm not making an argument about morality. I'm just saying that if people object to religious prosletyzing they should logically also object to secular prosletyzing on the same grounds, whatever those grounds may be.

And I'm saying that people do object. People object if you paint your house a color they don't like. People object if you use the wrong fork during dinner. People are stupid. I object to this whole thread! :D

I am a teenager. I post on forums. Ergo all people who post on forums are teenagers.

Spot the flaw in this argument....

I am a teenager who posts on forums. Gymoor was using me as his sole example of protest against secular prosletyzing. Therefore the only protest he refers to comes from a teenager who posts on forums.

So do motivational posters actually stop them from attacking eachother with scissors? Have you considered the demotivational variety (they're much more realisitic). Here's the site:http://www.despair.com
Yeah, thanks for the link, I've seen it before. No self-respecting employee in a management position would post one of those if the point of the exercise was to keep tension in the workplace down. Yeah, it would amuse the kids for like, twelve seconds (which could be JUST long enough to hide the scissors, maybe once), but seriously, dude.....I've got corporate supervisors who'd skin me for that crap. Maybe if it were an office, I could do it. Maybe if I had enough room in the breakroom, I would do it.

:rolleyes: By people I meant a bit more than teenagers on internet forums.
Hey, guess what, buddy. If you're going to mock your audience, you're going to lose further credibility. I'd think that somebody who likes to talk as much as you seem to would at least know that.

No it wouldn't. I see those everywhere. The only thing that makes people mad is when the government does it.

Maybe its a regional thing, at least billboard-wise. Are your movies like that too?(i.e., previews contain religious prosletyzing?) If so, I feel sorry for you.

Atheists don't engage in prosletyzing, they demolish idols.

As for secular prosletyzing, that does not exist (prosletyzing is religous preaching, secularism is nutrality towards religion). If your looking to call public service announcements/advertisements something negative, call them propoganda...

"Should" and "shouldn't" are moral terms implying that it is right for them to do this and wrong for them to do that. Your statement should have gone something like this:

"It is hypocritical for someone to oppose religious proselitization, but not to oppose proselitization of other views."

Followed by a logical proof of it, if you can make one.

I am a teenager who posts on forums. Gymoor was using me as his sole example of protest against secular prosletyzing. Therefore the only protest he refers to comes from a teenager who posts on forums.

I protest you saying that you're the only protestor of secular prosletyzing. Put someoneone in the Garden of Eden and they'll bitch about something eventually.

"Why do all the fig leaves give me a rash?"

"This perfect weather all the time is boring."

"Who let snakes in here?"

Simonist']
Hey, guess what, buddy. If you're going to mock your audience, you're going to lose further credibility. I'd think that somebody who likes to talk as much as you seem to would at least know that.

Message to everyone:

I WAS MOCKING MYSELF!! NOT YOU!!GET IT??

Sorry for the font, but I doubt you would notice otherwise.

Message to everyone:

I WAS MOCKING MYSELF!! NOT YOU!!GET IT??

Sorry for the font, but I doubt you would notice otherwise.

I protest your use of a big font.

I protest your use of a big font.

But does the government/media listen to your protest? That is the question.

And that is really the distinction I'm trying to make.

I second the objection.

I'm sorry Vegas-Rex but I would recommend people no longer post here. The original post's reasoning isn't sound. In other words as many other posters have noted there are many flaws in your arguements.

Sorry but it's true. I would recommend you read a few philosophy books to better understand your stated belief system then start posting again.

Joel

Message to everyone:

I WAS MOCKING MYSELF!! NOT YOU!!GET IT??

Sorry for the font, but I doubt you would notice otherwise.
I wasn't saying you were mocking me. I'm not even a friggin teenager, nor do I believe I act like one, especially if you're the model I have to base "teenage" activity off of. This is nonsense, you've done nothing but ignore the arguments brought up, you've constantly proven that the very statements you made as to your own nature are false, and now you're not even TRYING to understand the basic meaning of others' statements.

Congrats. Not only have you made the most useless post I've seen all day, but also come up with the absolutely worst arguments. Generally I have even a bit of respect for people with opposing views, but you've absolutely exhausted my tolerance. I honestly don't believe you're anything more than a young ignoramus trying to prove his mettle.

Protest that.

"Should" and "shouldn't" are moral terms implying that it is right for them to do this and wrong for them to do that. Your statement should have gone something like this:

"It is hypocritical for someone to oppose religious proselitization, but not to oppose proselitization of other views."

Followed by a logical proof of it, if you can make one.

Should is also a logical term. "If I drop the apple, it should fall." That's the meaning I'm using. In any case this is a really pointless argument.

Simonist']I wasn't saying you were mocking me. I'm not even a friggin teenager, nor do I believe I act like one, especially if you're the model I have to base "teenage" activity off of. This is nonsense, you've done nothing but ignore the arguments brought up, you've constantly proven that the very statements you made as to your own nature are false, and now you're not even TRYING to understand the basic meaning of others' statements.

Congrats. Not only have you made the most useless post I've seen all day, but also come up with the absolutely worst arguments. Generally I have even a bit of respect for people with opposing views, but you've absolutely exhausted my tolerance. I honestly don't believe you're anything more than a young ignoramus trying to prove his mettle.

Protest that.

I protest your rude response to the original poster.

But does the government/media listen to your protest? That is the question.

And that is really the distinction I'm trying to make.

If the protestor is loud enough and persistent enough and gets enought support, then of course the government/media eventually listen. If it's a lone loudmouth (like me,) they couldn't give a rodent's posterior.

Just noticed: everyone hates me again. I'll just hope they forget the next time I post somewhere. Usually do. Forgiving that way.

Anyway, as far as I know I have been addressing the arguments put against me. I agree, my first post was badly worded, but I thought people would get the intent rather than just assume I was stupid. I suppose that's a safe assumption, but it does get irritating, especially as I tend to assume you know what you're talking about.

Just noticed: everyone hates me again. I'll just hope they forget the next time I post somewhere. Usually do. Forgiving that way.

Anyway, as far as I know I have been addressing the arguments put against me. I agree, my first post was badly worded, but I thought people would get the intent rather than just assume I was stupid. I suppose that's a safe assumption, but it does get irritating, especially as I tend to assume you know what you're talking about.

I don't hate you. I just picked up the annoying protest theme and ran with it. It was an attempt at humor. I protest everyone's lack of laughter.

FYI, the word is "proselytise" (if you speak English, that is. Americans probably spell it "proselytize")

But NOWHERE is it "prosletyze".

FYI, the word is "proselytise" (if you speak English, that is. Americans probably spell it "proselytize")

But NOWHERE is it "prosletyze".
Naw, I'm pretty sure we still spell it with the 's' instead of the 'z'.

Then again, back in the day, I learned grammar, reading and such from a Scottish nanny. She ruined my basic American English skills. The nerve of some people, teaching the language in its original form.

Like learning Spanish in Spain rather than Puerto Rico.

(So help me God, if you EVEN try to cry 'ignorance' on that one.....)

Stupid non-fonetic langwajez.

FYI, the word is "proselytise" (if you speak English, that is. Americans probably spell it "proselytize")

But NOWHERE is it "prosletyze".

Thank you.

And yet when someone does post billboards that say "evolution is wrong" or "Jesus is the only Lord" (and I'm talking about the big roadside ones, not ones on their lawns) people object.
Do they? Well if they do, that's their right, just as it is your right to object to secular billboards. People can choose to display religious billboards or secular billboards (or even both if they wish), and people can choose to object to either type of billboard, or neither type of billboard or both. Perhaps you have an issue with freedom, but I kind of like it.

If you had to watch a "Join our Church" ad before watching Harry Potter, you would very likely give a flying fuck.
Wouldnt bother me any.

So why are secular messages any different?
News-Flash, they are not different! People can choose to display such messages, and people can choose to object to such messages. You may or may not the way that works out, (perhaps messages you like get objected to while messages you dont like face little resistance), that being the case, your problem is with freedom. Perhaps you can convince people freedom should be cast aside so unpopular messages can appear to be given the same reception as less unpopular messages, but I cant see you convincing too many people that they should give up freedom so that various propagandists can be on more equal footing with each other.