A simple question someone may be able to answer - does Metro Tasmania run any religious advertising on their buses?

If the answer is no then any claims of discrimination are a nasty smear, if the answer is yes then as a state owned entity they deserve whatever they get for refusing the ad's regardless of how little I like the idea.

Personally I've found what I've seen of the Athiest Foundations about as representative of my views as the average thiest finds the views of fundies who set themeselves up as the voice of their faith. They appear to represent an extreme that those who care for the kind of world we live in should reject. The impression given on OLO is of being part of the problem rather than the solution.

Pericles, Meredith, examinator, mjpb well said.

R0bert

One under God displays his ignorance. Atheism isn't a belief mate. Its knowledge, unlike your "faith" or "beliefs", both words that say directly "I have doubts".

And yes, more and more people are seeing through the insanity of folowing beliefs suited to ancient mankind and irrelevant today. As well as being untrue of course.

Your mention of "winning" says it all really you foolish man. It's not a contest. It's a matter of proof, evidence and considering alternatives to an invisible, never seen deity who never reacts to all those prayers, allows all the violence in the world and does nothing while those of "faith" create more of that violence than any other cause.

If that stuff is "winning" then you've been "winning" far too long.

Time for reality to set in and realise we don't need some Big Daddy to look after us and tell us what to think. Get a grip buddy or back in the trenches for your imagined war. The rest of us just get on with life.

Interesting those people who claim atheism and defend the stupidity of the believers. Yes it's their right to believe what they want but if they choose to rant in a public forum they get the deserved responses.

As to advertising. Why the horror and shame Pericles? Religions do it all the time. Do you complain loud and long about that? Let's hear you do that now please.

As to Meredith. What a pompous, ignorant attitude you have. There is no rule book for how to be an atheist. The only shared issue is we know there is no God. Don't you get one of the key problems with religion? Conformity through others words. Exactly what you want to impose. Shame on you.

Otherwise people can behave as they see fit. Not how you see fit. Your attitude is the embarrassment dear. Sounds like you've read "atheism for Dummies" to me.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with trying to humiliate someone who writes total rubbish and throws in lies and worse. What would you suggest? Say nothing and let them think that's a good thing to do? You'd crack very quickly if those of us willing to be aggressive against those fools did nothing but smile and say "ignorance is wonderful but I won't say anything cos I'm smugly ignorant".

Such attitudes from atheists indeed. Aren't you people sick of labels demanding some sort of behaviour that you have in your head? You may know God doesn't exist but you apparently know nothing about people. Sad.

pegasus>>Atheism isn't a belief mate.Its knowledge,unlike your"faith"or"beliefs",both-words that-say directly"I have doubts".>>

ok so doudts are these FACTS
infured in your use of;knowledge'?what facts exsactly underpin your knowing oh pegasus?

what facts egsist to disproove something dosnt egsist[by your measure],any'fact'or'knowledge'based on what is not known is hardly knowledge[more like its oppisite ignore-ance]

we read a holy script to know the unkown[we preserved any god like'miracle'unusual occurance,that meet that unusuality
to suggest gods hand[your facts can only be factual;based on testing'their'reports,REBUTTINg the reported event,[to prove a negative dont egsist bro it wont be'knowledge']

cause they had the wrong concept[they saw a'god'inflamed lunitic that slaughtered at whim[sought a blood seeking'god'who somehow get satif-faction from suffering[or judging his creation[thats more wrong than athiesm,to missjudge the god who gave all of us to live

[to think the life GIVER,enjoys the TAKING of life is worse than athism[simply not believing in this wrong-headed image of god,is not the same as believing religion does much wrong in his name.

seems there are at least two camps[under the one name]we have those who deney ANY god egsists,and those who feel by looking at gods fruit[religion]that an allpowerfull god[MUST]condone what they do in his name,thus he cant egsist because he lets it go on [thus either reject this tyranical god[or the abuses done by some in his name]

rightfully you do say there is no rule book[as such]for many called athiest[but many follow satans bible all the same[just as religion has its pretenders[vile in sheeps clothing][so does athiest have its demons[leading the debate into a formal structure,so as to be able to speak for others]the followers[the sheep ]they shear and preach their holy scriptures TO[and visions[read vidio]

i hate ALL preachers

thus i debate,that the athiest rule book can ever egsist[for PURE Athiests]then you got the;'other'athiest-types[following their godlessness deliberatly]deliberatly drawing others FROM knowing the living loving god who sustains ALL LIFE their lives to live[as they[we]chose]

who dont judge men by man nor godly measure,who loves everyone[who gave even the most decieving of the athiest their lives to live too!]
cheers

even the in your face smuggly provocative

meredith,

No, the Oxford dictionary doesn’t supply a correct definition of Atheism. And no, I did not agree that it did. Please refrain from misrepresenting me.

If you cannot escape into the present age, where Atheism is against the bad aspects of religion, that is your choice. More and more Atheists consider it a bad choice.

It is not that unusual nowadays for Atheists to be raised in a religion free zone Many of those Atheists suddenly find their lives interfered with by religion and we then are their first port of call. Not reacting unless driven by a personal experience, making one have to think, is a human hallmark.

Atheist organisations exist throughout the world and are extremely comfortable having the name Atheist as their banner and to be opposed to the excess of religion at the same time. These organisations speak for their members and for what can be gathered as the opinion of the majority of Atheists in any given country. Of course, there will be Atheists who disagree with AFA policy but we have evolved over 40 years to be inclusive of most.

You may be opposed to some of the issues on the AFA web site but we have found that to be a minority affair. I’m reasonably sure you would not be in opposition to most of the content. If you are, then you would not join us but pick an organisation closer to your views. Which Atheist orientated one are you in?

I assume you are saying, and I think you have gotten yourself into a self-made trap and have to keep going, that Atheist organisations should not exist. Who then is going to represent people adversely affected by religion? Who is going to lobby governments when religion tries to impose its dogmatic will? Who is going to help stop civilisation sliding back into the dark ages?

No, meridith, the Atheist Foundation of Australia Inc will retain its name and will continue to fight on your behalf even if you do not want us to and on behalf of others that do.

David

Seems to me the atheist are more divided than the Christian church. Thank you Meredith for your honesty. Your views are a lot more reasoned than the fundamentalist dogmas of David.