[Brutal Honesty]

(Original post by Bonged.)
Maybe. Maybe because of how it is designed to mock them they will fortify themselves deeper in their faith. If it was done respectfully and with more tact, it would do alot more good. That's just my opinion though. Obviously whoever made the billboard has the RIGHT to show it, just it is counter-productive in my view.

Assuming they get permission from the person who owns the billboard they do have the right to hire it and put their message on it. Christians or whoever can protests to the billboard owner to take it down.

[mariachi]

From the original article http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1342268.html

"We hope people can see just a little bit of discrimination we get," said Perce, who offended local Muslims last year when he dressed as a "Zombie Muhammad" in a Halloween parade.

"Religious" people do spend a lot of their time being offended : and this is exactly the kind of reaction which is being sought by their opponents, so as to make "religious" people look like intolerant, grumpy fools.

[Bonged.]

(Original post by adsyrah)
I don't think it mocks them. Offend, maybe.

I think it's pointing out that their religion has been used to opress people with black skin in the past and reminds them not to use it in a manner which will opress others now or in the future.

It's provocative and gets its point across very well.

Subjective of course. To me it seeks to humiliate them by linking historical racist practices with Christianity in modern america. Unless they are directly condemning slavery - billboards portraying chained africans will open old wounds. I don't think it was necessary to bring the race into it at all.

[HighwayUnicorn]

Okay, we get it. You don't like Christians

How is this Billboard going to do anything positive? Surely a Billboard about living your life without boundaries would be a more positive message than "OMG LOOK AT THIS QUOTE, CHRISTIANS ARE BAD" message which does nothing but conjure bad feelings.

[Bonged.]

(Original post by mariachi)
From the original article http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1342268.html

"We hope people can see just a little bit of discrimination we get," said Perce, who offended local Muslims last year when he dressed as a "Zombie Muhammad" in a Halloween parade.

"Religious" people do spend a lot of their time being offended : and this is exactly the kind of reaction which is being sought by their opponents, so as to make "religious" people look like intolerant, grumpy fools.

The reason why people will find this offensive is more about identity and race than the factual accuracy of what religious people believe.

[LeeC]

(Original post by NuckingFut)
Funnily enough, if a Christian did something like this about atheists, there would be an uproar about bigoted religious nuts. Now that its the atheists its all "free speech!!"

Because the Atheists aren't actually advocating slavery, and if a Christian did it, they probably would be advocating it. The situation is different.

[Notethis]

(Original post by Algorithm69)
American Christians: 'Free speech is ok unless we don't like it!'

That's quite a standard sentiment among both religious and secular folk. Rephrased, it's "Don't insult me".

[Bonged.]

(Original post by LeeC)
Because the Atheists aren't actually advocating slavery, and if a Christian did it, they probably would be advocating it. The situation is different.

Wait, what?

[AliceStrawbs]

I think it illustrates the point very well. Slavery happened, most black and brown people know (myself included), it doesn't need to be pussyfooted around.Yeah it's shocking but it's shocking when there's religious billboard up too.

[adsyrah]

(Original post by AliceStrawbs)
I think it illustrates the point very well. Slavery happened, most black and brown people know (myself included), it doesn't need to be pussyfooted around.Yeah it's shocking but it's shocking when there's religious billboard up too.

This hits the nail on the head for me. It's not something that should be glossed over.

Some truly evil things have happened in the past in the name of "religion" (in quotes as I don't believe any religion would condone some of the horrendous things the human race have done), and this billboard points it out. It's not nice, but it's the truth.

[Bonged.]

(Original post by adsyrah)
This hits the nail on the head for me. It's not something that should be glossed over.

Some truly evil things have happened in the past in the name of "religion" (in quotes as I don't believe any religion would condone some of the horrendous things the human race have done), and this billboard points it out. It's not nice, but it's the truth.

The particular slave trade in question - the transatlantic slave trade, was done very much in the name of money, rather than religion.

Fair enough but there aren't billboards around rural england reminding the working class that they used to be serfs. If we are going to remind everyone of their particular ethnic groups past sufferings, why not do it equally? Ethnic collectivism is never helpful.

[Algorithm69]

(Original post by MirandaPanda)
Well considering I'm an American History major at College too, not to mention someone who actually LIVES in the US (and was born/raised there for the most part), I'd still state I know a heck of a lot more about the country than you do - as evidenced by your prior post.

Nowhere have I shown ignorance of the US. You act like my prior post was a substantial analysis of American society or something. It was one sentence which no one can deny is true. Our disagreement is simply one of free speech. I think free speech is paramount over 'thinking about the children' and hurting peoples' feelings. You feel otherwise.

(Original post by MirandaPanda)
Yeah, who gives a crap about elementary school aged children and whether their feelings get hurt and/or unnecessary racial tensions are sprouted up; as long the message is put across, that's all that matters. Last time I checked, it was indeed the five-year-old kids who decide whether their family follows a religious path or not.

Its not pandering ( ) if the message is not only lost on kids, but also creates divisions/hurt in an environment where there shouldn't be any. It was just a stupidly executed plan and quite right that it got torn down.

You know, I've scoured Google News for evidence that this billboard is near a school. I've yet to find any. Every single article I have read has centered on the issue of racism (which the billboard is not) and not protecting the precious innocent children. To be honest, I couldn't care less about your children-centric argument.



And not only are you an enemy of free speech, you now support for vandalism and destruction of private property. Lovely.

[Algorithm69]

(Original post by Bonged.)
The particular slave trade in question - the transatlantic slave trade, was done very much in the name of money, rather than religion.

Fair enough but there aren't billboards around rural england reminding the working class that they used to be serfs. If we are going to remind everyone of their particular ethnic groups past sufferings, why not do it equally? Ethnic collectivism is never helpful.

It had religious and Biblical justification. See 'the curse of Ham'.

[Bonged.]

(Original post by Algorithm69)
It had religious and Biblical justification. See 'the curse of Ham'.

Very flimsy. "the curse of ham" is a fits-all-oppressors type of justification. It was also used against serfs in medieval europe. It's rather transparent.

[Algorithm69]

(Original post by Bonged.)
Very flimsy. "the curse of ham" is a fits-all-oppressors type of justification. It was also used against serfs in medieval europe. It's rather transparent.

It wasn't flimsy or transparent to slave societies.

[.eXe]

it's clear this was done by a brainless idiot only to incite hate against religion

[Bonged.]

(Original post by Algorithm69)
It wasn't flimsy or transparent to slave societies.

Or indeed to feudal societies, which further illustrates the use of the curse of ham by elites to subjugate weaker groups.

Should we start putting up billboards in rural england reminding the ex-serfs of the historical use of the curse of ham against them as well? Equality and all that.

[Algorithm69]

(Original post by Bonged.)
Or indeed to feudal societies, which further illustrates the use of the curse of ham by elites to subjugate weaker groups.

Should we start putting up billboards in rural england reminding the ex-serfs of the historical use of the curse of ham against them as well? Equality and all that.

If you want...

[Bonged.]

(Original post by Algorithm69)
If you want...

I would rather dispense of ethnic collectivism and pernicious identity politics altogether.

But if we are going to indulge ourselves in post colonial guilt why not indulge in some post feudal guilt too. Don't really understand the difference.

[alexs2602]

(Original post by MirandaPanda)
Well considering I'm an American History major at College too, not to mention someone who actually LIVES in the US (and was born/raised there for the most part), I'd still state I know a heck of a lot more about the country than you do - as evidenced by your prior post.

Because information and knowledge is hampered by geographical location in this day and age. You have little basis for this statement, in my opinion. You're an American history major; good. You live in the US; and? There are plenty of people who believe things about their own country which aren't true.