Backyard Skeptics Desecrate Bible, but not Koran?

[Alyakia]

Why aren't they desecrating the Sikh texts? And why aren't you asking why they aren't?

[Cannot think of a name]

Gang,

You are naturally free to disagree strongly with YGO - but I'm not sure that the best approach to disagreeing with him is to start a dogpile which turns into borderline flamebait.

I'm not trying to deflect my part in the latter (I get it...sorry), but for the former...how much is 'a dogpile,' I mean, is there some sort of quota? "Well, fifteen people have disagreed with him, sixteen would be too much." Do we delete our responses if five other people hit send when we were typing our disapproval? This seems like a vague and ill-defined issue. If someone puts up a demonstrably wrong post isn't it natural that, in a debate forum, people would demonstrate that it's wrong? I don't understand the dogpile thing. I'm not trying to be obtuse, I really want to understand it (and yes, I was ribbing the poster and accept the advice to focus on the argument and not the arguer, again, I'm not trying to deflect that, but rather clarify the other thing, since it has always seemed like a nebulous complaint).

[You-Gi-Owe]

Why aren't they desecrating the Sikh texts? And why aren't you asking why they aren't?

Sadly, I don't know what the Sikh tests are named.
As for Hindus, I get a little smile imagining Ghurkas with khukris chasing the Backyard Skeptics.

[The Rich Port]

Alrighty then, Archregimancy, I'll help things along.

YGO isn't mistaken due to his beliefs, but rather because of his backless claim (that the book burners are not protesting the Koran because they're afraid of retaliation from Muslim extremists) that seems to jump to conclusions.

YGO also seems to forget that Muslims are not the most violent group of religious extremists out there.

IMO, I would be more afraid to burn Bibles here in Florida. Christians aren't exactly peaceful.

And let's not forget Osama bin Laden's predecessor.

[Ashmoria]

I first heard about this on Beck's radio show, today. A group of Southern California atheists protesting by ripping out selected pages (which they find even more awful than the whole book) from the Bible.

While upholding their civil rights, I find them to be on the cowardly side. You don't see them trying to piss off the folks that might be more inclined to retaliate with physical violence, like the muslims.

What do you think?

http://www.examiner.com/atheism-in-los-angeles/atheist-demonstrators-to-rip-pages-from-the-bible-saturday

Los Angeles / Religion & Spirituality / Secular
Atheist demonstrators to rip pages from the Bible Saturday
Orange County, CA may be best known for TV shows about spoiled rich teens frolicing on the beach, but this Saturday (September 17) there'll be something different happening along the OC shores; a demonstration to publicize biblical immorality by a local atheist group. Backyard Skeptics, a local group of atheists, agnostics and skeptics will meet for lunch near the Huntington Beach pier and afterwards hold what their meetup page describes as an outreach program of dialogues with theists and anyone else who'd like to talk with them. But that's not all they're doing. According to the Orange County Register, they plan to publicly rip out passages from the Bible that they describe as promoting immoral laws.

From the OC Register:

“We’re not there to burn the Bible or desecrate,” Bruce Gleason, director of Backyard Skeptics, said. “There are plenty verses in the Bible that if you did any of those things today, you’d be thrown in jail immediately.”

Group members will rip out verses in the Bible such as Deuteronomy 22: 14-31, which says if a man finds his wife not to be a virgin, the community can stone her; or a later verse in the same chapter the Backyard Skeptics say can be interpreted to say that virgins who are raped will be forced to marry their rapist...

Gleason says the demonstration is based loosely on Thomas Jefferson’s Bible – an 86-page book that omits huge chunks of the New Testament, according the Religion News Service.

Jefferson’s Bible, which the Smithsonian National Museum of American History is restoring, chronicles Jesus’ life but leaves out the Resurrection and all miracles the Bible says Jesus was a part of.

“We will have copies of the Jefferson Bible (on Saturday),” Gleason said. “Out of 1,100 pages he only kept (86) of them. This is one of our Founding Fathers.”

I contacted Bruce Gleason to verify that they were going to actually tear pages out of bibles and he said, "We will be tearing pages from the bible but they MIGHT be photocopies - not directly from the Bible - we're playing this by ear because this might be a little to abrasive even though our point is that christians agree with atheists that some verses are not to be lived by."

The instructions on the Backyard Skeptics event meetup page reflect the less confrontational approach:

The main purpose of this outreach is to let other non-believers know that there is a group that exists for them where they can share the idea that we can be good without God. Although many believers approach us, we are not there to convert or debate, but rather to educate. It's not only entertaining to discuss an atheistic world-view with others, but it keeps us 'on our game' when discussing what we think is a better world-view.

If you join us, always be calm and considerate. I suggest talking with a Christian no more than 3 minutes if you feel they are there only to argue or challenge you. If there is a sincere conversation issuing, by all means continue.

It does not, however, offer instructions on how to tear pages out of bibles; or even mention the subject.

The Backyard Skeptics of Orange County is a very active group that has put up atheist themed-billboards (see Atheists are "getting ever so bold" in Southern california) and even more recently, posters in bus shelters (Atheists storm Calif. bus shelters with "no god" ads). More information about them can be found at their website and their meetup page gives details of the Huntington Beach demonstration and other upcoming activities. The demonstration will also be live streamed on UStream.com.

Continue reading on Examiner.com

its a dickish attention whore move.

but they probably dont have an expert on the koran in their group so they would look even more foolish ripping out random pages of a book they dont understand.

[Cannot think of a name]

Why aren't they desecrating the Sikh texts? And why aren't you asking why they aren't?

Sadly, I don't know what the Sikh tests are named.

The Guru Granth Sahib. From the second page where I made the same point. Well, it's one of them.

[EvilDarkMagicians]

Destroying a book is disgusting.

(Most of the time).

[Tubbsalot]

Incidentally, I have to agree that atheists burning books makes me uncomfortable, not to mention that they're just being dicks in general.

I'm not trying to deflect my part in the latter (I get it...sorry), but for the former...how much is 'a dogpile,' I mean, is there some sort of quota? "Well, fifteen people have disagreed with him, sixteen would be too much."

Obviously notamod, but I suspect the distinction is between sixteen counts of disagreement, and sixteen people circlejerking about how YGO is being ridiculous and is totally wrong.

Probably also the vague sense of hostility factors into the Dogpile classification.

[Wilgrove]

Destroying a book is disgusting.

(Most of the time).

Agreed. The only book I'd destroy is the Twilight saga.

[You-Gi-Owe]

Sadly, I don't know what the Sikh tests are named.

The Guru Granth Sahib. From the second page where I made the same point. Well, it's one of them.

Noted.

[Cannot think of a name]

Incidentally, I have to agree that atheists burning books makes me uncomfortable, not to mention that they're just being dicks in general.

I'm not trying to deflect my part in the latter (I get it...sorry), but for the former...how much is 'a dogpile,' I mean, is there some sort of quota? "Well, fifteen people have disagreed with him, sixteen would be too much."

Obviously notamod, but I suspect the distinction is between sixteen counts of disagreement, and sixteen people circlejerking about how YGO is being ridiculous and is totally wrong.

Probably also the vague sense of hostility factors into the Dogpile classification.

But isn't that just regular ol' flamebait and addressing the poster and not the post? How does it distinguish itself as a 'dogpile'? This is actually a question that has built, I occasionally see mods talk about 'dogpiles' but most often I see it from posters who complain that they are victims of 'dogpiles,' and it's been brewing up. I figured this time, I'd actually ask.

[Cannot think of a name]

Destroying a book is disgusting.

(Most of the time).

Agreed. The only book I'd destroy is the Twilight saga.

Once you've paid for the book I don't know that Ms. Meyer really cares what you do with it...as long as the check cashes.

[Farnhamia]

Gang,

You are naturally free to disagree strongly with YGO - but I'm not sure that the best approach to disagreeing with him is to start a dogpile which turns into borderline flamebait.

It's hardly a secret that he's a very conservative Tea Party supporter (and one who apparently watches Glenn Beck). That absolutely puts him in a very small minority in this forum - but he has the same rights and responsibilities as everyone else. He's free to express his opinion, no matter how much of an unpopular minority opinion it is here, so long as he's not in breach of the site rules; and the fact that he is in a small minority doesn't give the rest of you an automatic right to dogpile into him every time he expresses an opinion here.

I shouldn't have to tell most of you by now to attack the substance of the OP rather than ridicule the person making the OP. And if you think the OP has no substance, then you're free to point that out too.

I'd like to have faith in your collective ability to do so without open baiting of the OP.

Or, of course, you can indeed simply ignore the thread entirely.

You know I love ya, Arch, but "simply ignore the thread entirely"?

The fault, dear Arch, is not in our stars but in ourselves if we rise to You-Gi's bait. And the baiting is mutual. At this late date our conservative friend cannot be unaware of the response his threads evoke in the population of NSG. The threads, most of them, have just enough content to escape being locked as pointless or as trolling but more often than not include a challenge to the liberals here ("Why aren't they desecrating the Koran?" "Is this an Obama Cult of Personality?") that most of us, sadly, can't resist. Once the minimal content is dealt with, the momentum generated often sends the thread straight into a dog-pile, as you say.

I swear by my long-lost Lagash, I try to stay away from You-Gi's threads, or to at least post only in rebuttal of the subject. I really do. I just wish he would meet me halfway and not create threads that pin a great big target on his chest.

[Southern Patriots]

Those kids need to get a better hobby than trolling christians.

[The Rich Port]

The Guru Granth Sahib. From the second page where I made the same point. Well, it's one of them.

Noted.

His points (which are probably pretty good) or the name of the book (irrelevant in the grand scope of things)?

[Selung]

I think there's a fallacy in the poll. One could agree with the statement that burning Bibles is safer while maintaining that atheists aren't afraid of burning the Quran. Also, no joke option.

[The Rich Port]

I think there's a fallacy in the poll. One could agree with the statement that burning Bibles is safer while maintaining that atheists aren't afraid of burning the Quran. Also, no joke option.

Not a fallacy, per se.

A more correct definition is bias. [/living dictionary]

[The Congregationists]

Atheists are going to be more insulted by the religion that shoves things in their face. And Christianity is the ultimate 'stick-it-in-people's-faces' religion. You don't get Muslims knocking on your door with piles of magazines.

Not in this part of the world, which is, I think, the essential point here. Atheists, in the western world at least, are much more likely to have to deal with Christians than Muslims, hence their protests are more likely to target them.

I would disagree that Islam is not a "stick it in your face" type of religion, however. A look at their history clearly refutes this.

[Unchecked Expansion]

Atheists are going to be more insulted by the religion that shoves things in their face. And Christianity is the ultimate 'stick-it-in-people's-faces' religion. You don't get Muslims knocking on your door with piles of magazines.

Not in this part of the world, which is, I think, the essential point here. Atheists, in the western world at least, are much more likely to have to deal with Christians than Muslims, hence their protests are more likely to target them.

I would disagree that Islam is not a "stick it in your face" type of religion, however. A look at their history clearly refutes this.

It is, essentially, like asking why the student fees protests in the UK weren't about Obama's stimulus package.

[The Anti-Cosmic Gods]

Why desecrate the Koran when people like YGO and his ilk will do it for you?

[Keronians]

I can't really argue with "it's safer to desecrate the Bible than the Qu'ran", but I think it's because, in the US, and most of the Western world, Christianity is far more important and relevant than Islam. That is the reason, IMO.

[Farnhamia]

Atheists are going to be more insulted by the religion that shoves things in their face. And Christianity is the ultimate 'stick-it-in-people's-faces' religion. You don't get Muslims knocking on your door with piles of magazines.

Not in this part of the world, which is, I think, the essential point here. Atheists, in the western world at least, are much more likely to have to deal with Christians than Muslims, hence their protests are more likely to target them.

I would disagree that Islam is not a "stick it in your face" type of religion, however. A look at their history clearly refutes this.

Indeed, we've mentioned the early history of Islam and it was, as you say, different then. Today, which is what Nakarisaune was talking about, Muslims are less in your face, unless there is a perceived insult or threat to their faith. Then, sadly, they are likely to be far more violent in protest than Christians.

[The Anti-Cosmic Gods]

Muslims are less in your face, unless there is a perceived insult or threat to their faith. Then, sadly, they are likely to be far more violent in protest than Christians.

Unless you live anywhere but America. Then they are in your face and often times rioting.

[Unchecked Expansion]

Muslims are less in your face, unless there is a perceived insult or threat to their faith. Then, sadly, they are likely to be far more violent in protest than Christians.

Unless you live anywhere but America. Then they are in your face and often times rioting.

Last riots here weren't overly Muslim. Last religious bunch in my face wasn't Muslim either. So, not the UK either

[The Anti-Cosmic Gods]

Unless you live anywhere but America. Then they are in your face and often times rioting.

Last riots here weren't overly Muslim. Last religious bunch in my face wasn't Muslim either. So, not the UK either

Because if the last riot and the last obnoxious proselytizer weren't Muslims it naturally follows that they never do it.