How Should Atheists Respond to a Christian Bus Advert?
- Image by carlosfpardo via Flickr
According to the Daily Mail, a Christian group has responded to the atheist bus adverts with their own, which reads:
There definitely is a God. So join the Christian party and enjoy your life.
Ignoring the dubious veracity of the Daily Mail, I want to ask a simple question. If this planned advert is real, how should atheists respond? I believe the question is more complex that it first appears, and we have two clear choices. Do we report them to the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) or not?
Report them to the ASA
Whilst the atheist advert rightfully had an expression of uncertainty and doubt (the iconic “probably”), the Christian one does not. It is an absolute statement that not only says there is a God, but that the margin for error is zero. Given that the ASA already ruled that the atheist bus advert was legal as it expressed an opinion, they will probably rule that the Christian bus advert would be illegal since it states itself as factual rather than opinionated. An advert such as “There probably is a God” would be far more opinionated, even if it is unoriginal.
Don’t report them to the ASA
Whilst I think a lot of us would get a kick out of seeing a Christian advert campaign fail, is complaining really any different to the way the Christians treated us? It looks closely like a double standard, where just because we want our message out there, we must fight against other messages. Perhaps we should stand up for free speech instead of doing what the Christians tried to do and stifle it. Let them have their advert, and make our lack of an outcry a testimony to our strength as a community that are willing to have all ideas thrown into the arena, even if those ideas are direct threats against certain groups of people.
Otherwise, how are we any different to the Christian bigot who refused to go to work because he didn’t like the message. It shouldn’t be about whether the message is legal or not. It should be about the message getting an equal chance to be displayed, even if our own messages have to comply with strict guidelines.
So what are your views?
If the adverts do run on buses, will you complain? Or will you simply point and laugh at the Christian groups that claim our message is “offensive” and yet have an even more invasive one? Will not protesting make us any better as a group, or am I talking absolute rubbish?
Contact Adrian Hayter
My Facebook
My Atheist Nexus Page
My Twitter
My Reddit
My Atheist Spot
My FriendFeed
My Technorati
Atheist Forums
Loading ...
*This is a response from the USA. Take it for what it's worth* My knee-jerk reaction is to complain. Christians are very visible in society, atheists aren't. Most people will see the second advert and go "Oh yeah. That's good." I don't see why they should get a free pass on adverting standards when you know such a pass would not be extended to our group. I'm all for live and let live, but I do think that a retaliatory stance maybe appropriate in a game of tit-for-tat. Perhaps I misunderstand the rules of the game, though.
This is also from the USA. I think the long term goal of expanding freedom of speech overrides the short term goal of making Christians squirm. Perhaps the next ad campaign can be, "No, there is no god. Deal with it."
I say move on and always be on the front foot. Let them chase our tails. This should be part of a long running and clever campaign to spread the news that you dont have to believe in God to be a happy and good person. The last thing we should do is respond to it. Oh and let them spend money on this instead of other things!
From Australia here – so given recent events here I may be somewhat biased. If it comes to be, it simply has to be challenged Each little chipping away at your freedoms as an atheist seems innocuous, until suddenly you can't vote without a bible, for example – to be stupidly alarmist. Or perhaps more realistically – suddenly an atheist message isn't allowed on any bus all.
By letting it go unchallenged you fall into the trap of letting them frame the issue – it is then goes back to the tired problem of you proving He doesn't exist, rather than the other way around as it should be.
Anyway, I don't doubt someone will make a complaint, even if the consensus was not to. It is just too delicious an opportunity to pass up (although the authority will certainly find some way to weasel out of making a strong decision either way).
Complaints or not the atheists but should immediately! Either take out "probably", change it for "definitively" or change the whole fisrt sentence to "There is no evidence of God. Science works. Secular Humanism unites" <img src="http://img18.picoodle.com/img/img18/3/2/7/t_busm_fca647a.jpg" border="0" alt="Image Hosting by Picoodle.com" />
If I see one around, I'm sending in a complaint (but only if I actually see the ad myself).
While complaining might seem to be a tit-for-tat "you complained at us so we're complaining at you" thing, the situation is different. For one, the wording. There's probably no god is not a claim or statement of fact, it's an opinion, letting other people know that there are atheists out there and they're not alone. "There definitely is a god", or the other ad that is going to be run, "the fool hath said in his heart, there is no god" are a definitive claim/statement of fact and an insult, respectively.
To let these go unchallenged just seems wrong. If their response had been milder, along the lines of "There probably is a god" or "look into your heart and find god" or something, then I wouldn't have a problem with them. They'd be opening up some form of debate or line of reasoning in the minds of people. But that's not what they're trying to do; they're going with the age old religious response of "YES THERE IS SHUT UP" or "WE'RE RIGHT YOU'RE WRONG SHUT UP", and that to me is just insulting, and it's time that a public stand was made against that type of thing, and this is the perfect time to do it.
That said, there's no way in hell (ironically) that the ASA will pull these adverts, even if they are in violation of their rules. After all the fuss kicked up over the atheist adverts, they will *not* risk pulling a christian advert out of the public sphere. The daily mail's reader base alone would be able to bombard them with complaints, and would probably cause them to back down.
So any complaints we (i.e. us atheists) send in will likely only be purely symbolic, but I still think it needs to be done.
On another note, the "there definitely is a god so join the christian party" might get some complaints from the large muslim and sikh populations in the UK (since there's the unspoken claim that the one real god is the christian god).
By the way, there are three christian response advert campaigns running, not just this one:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/feb/05/athei...
The Christian Party are going with:
"There definitely is a God. So join the Christian Party and enjoy your life."
The Russian Orthadox Church is going with:
“There IS a God, BELIEVE. Don’t worry and enjoy your life.” (which is the mildest in my opinion).
And the Trinitarian Bible Society is going with:
“The fool hath said in his heart, there is no God,” (which is the one I'm personally most opposed to).
It should be challenged, if it fails this gives full licence to post 'there is not god' style posters
I think you have presented us with a false dichotomy. Filing a report with the ASA will be fruitless because the Christian statement in question is an opinion. In advertising, I am free to promote my product by saying, “new lima bean flavoured soda pop definitely tastes great”, or “you’ll definitely love our new dirt flavoured chewing gum”. It’s just an opinion.
It seems that most everyone who commented is missing the point. This Christian statement represents the desperate Hail Mary play of an organization in its death throws. This attempt is really quite amusing, and a little sad. Fellow atheists, don’t be afraid to board their bus with pride, and a little apathy. Their numbers are dwindling as ours grow and this opposition in the form of a bus will only help our cause. It will fuel the debate and will only serve to bring to light questions of logic and reason from believers. They will see the difference between our ‘probably’ and their ‘definitely’ and wonder. We have always taken the high road. I’d prefer to stay there and let them come to us.
Perhaps I was misunderstanding the result of the ruling, but I was under the impression that the only reason we weren't allowed to use "There is no God" is that it is an absolute statement and you cannot have that in advertising because it opposes another idea (namely, theism). You can have a statement like "Tastes delicious" on an advert because it isn't a single view, it can be said for many different products (even competitors). What you cannot do is say "Coca Cola is way better than Pepsi" because whilst it is an opinion, it opposes the idea that Pepsi is way better than Coca Cola. This is why Carlsberg got away with "probably the best beer in the world", because it wasn't saying "Carlsberg is better than Guiness".
I agree with you though, we should just ignore their futile attempts to get attention.
<object width="425" height="355"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/k27dhYWtnGQ&hl=en"></param> <param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/k27dhYWtnGQ&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed> </object>
How about we push the message "You don't need to believe nonsense for your life to make sense" or "Better an uncomfortable truth than a comfortable lie" or "Fairytales may be comforting, but we outgrow them eventually". Or anything that places the emphasis on alternatives to silly beliefs? I'm pretty sure many more people would be interested in alternatives to religious nonsense, but the only alternative seems to be a giant empty space where they used to have comfort. For example, how do you tell someone who just watched their child die that they will never see them again? Religion jumps in when you're suffering and helps delude the pain away. Atheism has to start offering philosophical alternatives and pushing them HARD.
Let them waste their money while we move onto the next battle :)
I think you are absolutely right to say that this is a hard one. If the Christian ad is truly a violation of ASA policy, then I would say report them. Christians should be held to the same expectations as everyone else. If their ad does not appear to violate ASA policy, then I'd say skip the complaining and simply respond.
I would not be happy with the current wording of their advert. I say report to ASA.
I vote for "Better an uncomfortable truth than a comfortable lie."