29. Posted by Eric Wittke at 1:7 PM on Oct 05, 2009 | Report this comment

If you need to suppress the opposing view in order to retain your faith, then what does that say about your faith? This is a paraphrase of a Muslim man on the local PBS radio station regarding these ads. I find it to be a very good question.

28. Posted by Fair at 11:39 PM on Aug 07, 2009 | Report this comment

I can see what you mean, but until reading the comments I didn't realize that church/religious organizations were allowed to advertise on the bus ads as well. So as long as the church/religious organizations are also allowed to post their messages then all's fair. Besides as a Christian myself I believe that we were given free will, and that is in essence what is being exercised here.

27. Posted by Seattle Nate at 1:45 AM on Jul 11, 2009 | Report this comment

I understand and agree in principle with what you are trying to say. However, I think you fail to realize the implication of your position. In fairness, I am an atheist, so I may have a bias here, but please read my comment with my respect and apply as fit. The atheist group attempted to purchase ad space on the busses. They were refused this right. Churches purchase ad space on public busses all the time, to spread the word of their specific beliefs, and to advertise their denomination, and attract new members. If I were to say that all of these church advertisements must also contain a clause of "Atheists are moral people too," would it seem appropriate or fair? How about a Pepsi ad that talks about the delicious flavor of coke? The point of an advertisement of this type is to attract people with similar mindsets and spread the word of organizations that accept them. Being an atheist is hard, we are the least accepted group in the country (it's true, more people would vote for a gay muslim than an atheist) and these advertisements are an attempt by our growing community at outreach to those still in hiding. Basically we figure closet atheists would know that its okay to be open about their beliefs, and people who are religious are going to disregard our message regardless, so there is no harm. I did my best to explain my position, and meant no offense if any where conveyed. Please feel free to post constructive replies, as I am curious about why there seems to be a double standard with atheism.

26. Posted by lc41788 at 12:26 AM on Jul 07, 2009 | Report this comment

I consider myself to be tolerant of Atheists. I understand where they are coming from and why they question (I think that most good Christians have questioned, too). That aside, I STILL have an issue with these ads. Until recently, I was friends with some of the people highly active in this organization. It seems as though many of them don't know how to promote their cause without bashing others. Every day on Facebook, one of these "friends" posted a mocking video about Jesus, a demeaning blog about Christianity, or an insulting picture. I would guess that some of the people reading and commenting on this article are members of this organization. If you are, please keep this in mind... My entire life as a Christian student, I have been brought up to respect and try to understand your views. I've never in my life made a demeaning comment about Atheism, and as a matter of fact, have gone out of my way to defend it. If you want respect, then you should give respect. Until then, I'll never support this specific organization or an effort to advertise on their behalf.

25. Posted by MrLogic at 12:5 PM on Jun 17, 2009 | Report this comment

you do realize she lives in indiana, home of John Hostetler (When will the war on christianity end!?!). "If the atheists wish to give their point of view, they are free to do it, but not on public transportation." in other words, believe what you will, but you have no right to buy advertising space to deny what I believe. Having signs saying "don't believe there's not a heaven or hell? don't bet on it, you'll surely lose". that's ok. Interesting how much I'm sure she respects freedom of speech, as long as it isn't in public. that's real american for you. Maybe she just doesn't understand that PUBLIC transportation doesn't mean her tax dollars go to the godless commie atheists. God I hope she's not a teacher.

24. Posted by mightymatt at 11:12 AM on Jun 16, 2009 | Report this comment

Robin Smith, you are not a very bright or thoughtful person. Really? If the bus has an ad that says one thing it is obligated to have an ad that shows an opposing point of view? So if they run a coke ad does this mean that they have to run an ad for pepsi? What if pepsi is not interested in running a bus ad. Is the transit authority obligated to run it for free just to make certain the opposing view is out there? How about an ad telling kids to abstain from sex? I guess there would be an obligation to run an ad telling kids to go nuts and have wild orgies. You whine about Christian voices being silenced while at they same to you cheerlead the silencing of a minority view point. The "Christian voice" completely permeates our society. The second there is an opposing voice you not only demand that it be shut up, but you climb up on your cross and cry persecution. The truth is that you have had your "Christian" view as the dominant and, for all intents a purposes, only view for a long time. You like it that way and you intend to keep it that way. There are many theists who are interested in having reasonable discourse with non theists. You comments show that you have zero interest in any discourse at all.

23. Posted by TXatheist at 11:5 AM on Jun 16, 2009 | Report this comment

Mariano, what makes you think I didn't also send my usual check to save Darfur and Doctors without borders? You'd be wrong as both checks cleared my account. md457@hotmail.com

22. Posted by liz at 10:36 AM on Jun 16, 2009 | Report this comment

also, try substituting atheist for pretty much any other social/cultural group: - If Jews wish to give their point of view, they are free to do it, but not on public transportation. - If African-Americans wish to give their point of view, they are free to do it, but not on public transportation. - If furries wish to give their point of view, they are free to do it, but not on public transportation. see how that's not quite fair?

21. Posted by liz at 10:32 AM on Jun 16, 2009 | Report this comment

if a christian group wanted to pay for an ad that says "jesus saves", they're completely entitled to do so! but advertising doesn't work on rules of "fairness". if coca-cola buys an ad, the company selling the advertising space don't have to post an ad saying "but pepsi is okay too!" just to be "fair". advertising = money. if atheists want to pay for space, they are 100% entitled to do so, as long as their advertising does not infringe upon the rights of others. and saying "You Can Be Good Without God' certainly doesn't infringe upon anyone's rights.

20. Posted by Mariano at 9:25 AM on Jun 16, 2009 | Report this comment

Of course, the atheists should have their ads displayed since: Their ideas discredit themselves and so should be on display as often as possible. During a time of worldwide recession atheists in the US and UK are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars in donated funds not in order to help anyone in need but in order to attempt to demonstrate just how clever then think themselves to be—need any more be said?

19. Posted by Reginald Selkirk at 4:51 PM on Jun 15, 2009 | Report this comment

"If Bloomington Transit gives in to this message, then by all fairness, they should post messages with the opposing view such as “Jesus Saves.”" Yes, well do they? would the transit company allow that, or any other religious message in a bus ad? Maybe you could research this before writing your next letter to the editor.

18. Posted by Paul at 2:42 PM on Jun 15, 2009 | Report this comment

Robin Smith has poorly thought out her argument. She states that “…advertising this one slogan only gives one point of view”. Meanwhile, the Indiana BMV gives away “In God we trust” license plates and does not have a "I believe in nothing" plate. If the state government (funded by public tax dollars) can promote religion, it seems only fair that the local government allow a private entity to promote Atheism. Ms. Smith: The logic of your argument would allow the very thing you do not want! Spend some more time in the editing stage.

17. Posted by Jay Hutchison at 1:27 PM on Jun 15, 2009 | Report this comment

lol @ Christians = Washington Nationals. Made my day.

16. Posted by twinbeech at 11:9 AM on Jun 15, 2009 | Report this comment

The simple facts are that Christians only make up 33% of the world pop. of 6,790,062,216 (July 2009 est.) Leaving aside the fact that half of them think the other half are doomed, this means that over 4 1/2 billion people in the world totally reject the notion that Jesus is their "personal saviour". Do the numbers (as I have) and you will find that Gentle Jesus Meek and Mild, with his pronouncement in John 14:6 has condemned these 4 1/2 billion (along with billions to follow ) to eternal agony. I'll save you the math...thats 71 per minute. The Washington Nationals baseball team came in dead last in the 2008 Major League standing with a win loss record of "only" 37 percent. They had three months to practice. Even their own fans were so disappointed many of them called their team "sorry losers". Christians, on the other hand have won only 33 percent and they have had 2000 years to practice. If the Nationals are sorry losers with 37% how does that look for Christians with 33%. And that's if we allow all the child molesting priests and horny unfaithful Baptist preachers in. I will lay the argument to rest with two examples. FIRST; Christopher Hitchens has challenged his opponents to, "Name one ethical act performed or statement made by a believer that could not have been performed or made by a non-believer." So far no Christian has met that challenge. Then he says, "Name one evil action performed or statement made because of religion." Here we have a plethora of choices. SECOND: The National Academy of Sciences is made up of over 2100 members, the creme de la creme of the scientific world, many of which hold Nobel Prizes. 93.6 of the membership does not believe in a personal god. Who can deny these hard working, intelligent men and women can be good without god.

15. Posted by DS at 10:59 AM on Jun 15, 2009 | Report this comment

I disagree that you can equate "you can be good without god" with "jesus saves" simply because you can factually and objectively verify the former but not the latter. I can show objective evidence of a godless heathen doing good. For example, Warren Buffet giving $37 billion to charity would probably convince any sane person that "you can be good without god". But how do you objectively show that "jesus saves"? Once you introduce the supernatural into a statement your ability to provide evidence supporting your claim goes out the window. These two statements are not equal and should indeed be treated differently.

14. Posted by Jay Hutchison at 10:46 AM on Jun 15, 2009 | Report this comment

You strongly disagree with the statement, you can be good without god? Not only that, you're offended by it? Get a life.

13. Posted by Tannie at 10:40 AM on Jun 15, 2009 | Report this comment

You know, I've never heard of Coke having to - in order to be fair! - display their adds right next to Pepsi ones. Bigots.

12. Posted by satanhimself at 7:13 AM on Jun 15, 2009 | Report this comment

I don't know of any atheist who would object to Christians (or other religionists) buying ad space on buses. In fact, many atheists would be willing to go to bat for any religionists who would be denied equal opportunity to spread their message. Ms. Smith is clueless about atheists, and she doesn't understand the concept of a public forum.

11. Posted by Brendan Diglettle at 5:14 AM on Jun 15, 2009 | Report this comment

Hi Robin.. check out this chart: http://img240.imageshack.us/img240/4707/cuethepitchartangz4.gif

10. Posted by Buffy at 2:54 AM on Jun 15, 2009 | Report this comment

"I can’t speak for the atheists, but my guess is that they find Christian slogans or bumper stickers offensive. Well, I find their sticker offensive, and if Bloomington Transit uses their slogan, then Christian slogans should also be allowed on public transportation." Are Christian organizations not allowed to advertise on public transportation in Bloomington? They are elsewhere. And why is it that Christians always demand "balance" if atheists, LGBT people or others they dislike want to say something? Do you insist that both Coke and Pepsi have equal time? If Levi's were to advertise their jeans on the buses would you insist Wrangler and every other brand be afforded a chance to state why their products are as good or better?

9. Posted by bh at 12:41 AM on Jun 15, 2009 | Report this comment

Backing up what others have said here, this international movement started in response to wide number of religious ads out there (and the amount of social silence about atheism before recent years). I don't see how this particular slogan is at all controversial. Instead of imaging "Jesus Saves", consider the actual parallels: "You can be good and be Christian" or "You can be good and be Jewish." Are either of those too controversial to display?

8. Posted by Merv at 12:18 AM on Jun 15, 2009 | Report this comment

The point of the ad is that people assume that others have to be evil (or at least misguided) if they don't subscribe to some particular religion (around these parts, Christianity). You can disagree with the statement all you want, but it's true; people can be good without believing in deities. Whether I'd put it on a bus is a different matter since my preference is to let people come to those conclusions on their own. BTW, that's limited to adults choosing whether or not to follow a religion; kids don't have the intellectual capacity to do anything more than mimic what the adults in charge tell them is right.

7. Posted by tolerance at 11:40 PM on Jun 14, 2009 | Report this comment

I don't think most Christians are really upset about this ad. The real issue is that it's a counter-ad, instead of a support ad. Saying 'Jesus Saves' is something that supporting something, as opposed to 'repent, avoid hell' which is a counter-ad. I highly doubt that the Bloomington Transit authority would let an ad put up that says 'repent, avoid hell.' The 'good without god' ad is interesting, it's a counter-ad that tells people not to be something. If Atheists don't believe in a god, they should just ignore the concept because in their worldview they are technically concerned over 'nothing.' An ad like 'atheists for love or peace' would be much more effective.

6. Posted by TruthSeeker at 10:41 PM on Jun 14, 2009 | Report this comment

Good call George... I doubt that anyone is stopping religious groups from posting their message. And Robin Smith--in America, we have what is called the first amendment, apparently you haven't heard of it. One provision of the first amendment allows everyone to have freedom of speech (subject to time/place/manner restrictions). Government and quasi-government entities cannot restrain speech based on content. To restrain speech based on content is when the determining factor for prohibiting speech is the message the speech shares. Just wait a year or so--Bloomington Transit will face a court injunction and a heafty punitive damage for their unconstitutional acts.

5. Posted by Johann at 10:21 PM on Jun 14, 2009 | Report this comment

You...do realize that these ad campaigns started as a *response* to Christian ads saying that all non-Christians will go to hell, right?

4. Posted by George at 9:55 PM on Jun 14, 2009 | Report this comment

I can't imagine anyone objecting to the posting of opposing views. Is there anyone actually suggesting only the Atheist bus campaign be allowed to post?

3. Posted by Ryan Noble at 8:49 PM on Jun 14, 2009 | Report this comment

Robin is promoting a false dichotomy by asserting that the opposite of "You can be good without God" is "Jesus Saves." Christianity is only one religion amongst a plethora of faiths that mankind has ever adopted, and it is a very Christian centric view that the opposite of atheism MUST be Christianity. No, if all points of view are ACTUALLY desired on these buses then we would have a long advertisement indeed, promoting Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Zoroastrianism, and hundreds (thousands?) of others. But an all inclusive counter to "You can be good without God" isn't a lesson in world religion. No, it's actually very simple ... it would be "You CANNOT be good without God." What a horrid and insular philosophy that is, asserting that those who do not subscribe to your particular point of view are not simply the subject of disagreement ... but they are actually BAD people. It's this mindset that has Christians viscerally offended by these ads ("Well ... it's one thing that atheists are free to run around not believing as WE do ... but now they're claiming THEY can be GOOD too?!?! That's very offensive!") Both atheists and theists should be free to buy ad space on buses, and the reader should be reminded that the atheist bus campaign was started in response to some particularly nasty Christian bus ads. That's right, Christians were the first to buy bus ad space, not atheists. They've been getting their say all along. So the issue isn't so much about Christians being allowed to express their opinions. The real issue is that atheists are only now just starting to make a tiny peep in the theistic cacophony that surrounds us, and Christians aren't liking atheists getting their say one bit.

2. Posted by Vopat at 8:42 PM on Jun 14, 2009 | Report this comment

The true injustice is what is happening to the Christians? How about turing it around and having a sign that reads: "You can be good with God." Even though I strongly disagree with that statement you should be much happier with it.

1. Posted by joe at 7:59 PM on Jun 14, 2009 | Report this comment

Give me a break. In my town, I have 6 christian radio stations 4 christian tv stations everywhere I turn I see christian media.In Idaho we have christian and mormon churches on every corner. Religous people come to my front door every week. Why are so many christians threatened by one single atheist media campaign? Maybe you would feel safer under Sharia Law?