Comments on: The Children of the New BHA Billboards Are Not ‘Christian’

By: Mariano

Mariano — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 02:04:16 +0000

This is merely more atheist propaganda as Richard Dawkins wonders whether there is occasion for “society stepping in” and hopes that such efforts “might lead children to choose no religion at all.” Dawkins also supports the atheist summer camp “Camp Quest.” Furthermore, with this campaign they are attempting to piggy back on the United Nations.

Phillip Pullman states the following about his “fictional” books for children, “I don't think I'm writing fantasy. I think I'm writing realism. My books are psychologically real.” But what does he really write about? As he has admitted, “My books are about killing God” and “I'm trying to undermine the basis of Christian belief.”

More evidence here:
http://atheismisdead.blogspot.com/2009/11/decepti...

Yet again, atheists are collecting “amazing sums” during a time of worldwide recession not in order to help anyone in real material need but in order to attempt to demonstrate just how clever they consider themselves to be—while actually loudly, proudly and expensively demonstrating their ignorance and arrogance—need any more be said?

By: Graham

Graham — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 20:23:40 +0000

In the words of Pink Floyd (almost)…

Hey, preacher!
Leave them kids alone.

By: Paul Huxley

Paul Huxley — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 08:52:31 +0000

I find it outrageous that I should be labeled as "British" before I was able to choose to be British. How dare anyone call me British as a two year old, before I am able to profess for myself any loyalty to the Queen?

(Disgusted of Sussex)

By: PaulSJenkins

PaulSJenkins — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 23:46:59 +0000

I wondered if the latest campaign was perhaps a little low-key, but thanks to Ruth Gledhill and The Times it's getting plenty of coverage.

Also, it's symptomatic of the absurd sensitivity of religious folks that they are consistently misinterpreting the campaign, reading all sorts of evil subtext into a simple message — that children shouldn't be labelled with the religion of their parents. The ads say nothing about "brainwashing" or "child abuse", but some of the articles covering the campaign are written as if the ads are a vicious attack on people of faith.

What's the difference between an atheist and a "militant" atheist? Answer: a militant atheist is one who actually speaks.

By: Paul

Paul — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 21:25:03 +0000

Far from not mattering that such children appear in the advert, these are precisely the sort of children who *should* appear in it. They are the children who need protection from being labelled, who might be asking their parents to desist if only they understood the issue. It is a beautiful irony that the father should have allowed his own children to be use to highlight his own failing.

The children of those of us parents who never labelled them have no need to ask!

As for "Obviously there is something in their faces which is different" … bullshit. I can show you plenty of pictures of equally happy-looking unlabelled children brought up by non-religious parents.