Alternative bus slogans

Verity

James, I agree with your comment, but I wish you would stop trying to sound American under the impression that this is quite cool.

The word gotten is not in common parlance in British publications and even if an American columnist wrote it, the British sub would change it to "got".

You could rightly claim that 'gotten' was originally English (as in 'forgotten')and was taken to America by the people of the time. They continued the usage, but we didn't. Like 'Fall' for 'Autumn'. It's very pretty and evocative, but it's not English English.

Augustus

Churchill said that he was ready to meet his Maker; "but whether my Maker is prepared for the great ordeal of meeting me is another matter." Not arrogant, but a witty uncomplicated approach to belief.

One cannot argue with the fact that it is good to focus on a light in the darkness. If that light leads you somewhere, all well and good and you are lucky. If it does not, or you will not allow it to, or if you think yourself clever enough to see in the dark, then in that case you're on your own. Good luck!

Silent Hunter

I do hope Obama doesn't disappoint us all, but especially his two girls by proclaiming....

"There's probably no Dog....."

Bruce Robertson

"There's probably no God?" Bit wimpish for proselytising atheists!

Tiberius

I cannot see any reason why the question of God is ever a burning issue for an atheist unless they have doubts about their convictions.

biggestaspidistra

it is difficult to understand why in a country that has become directionless, spiritually bankrupt, where the power of the state has permeated everything, that atheists feel they need to advertise, and then with such a drab, bland message. The peace movements 'practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty'
seems like inspired genius in comparison.

Peter Mc

Hang on. This God makes us with free will, insists we go to a building in his name every week, makes some their grow hair or mutilate our genitals in a certain way to please him, gives us a list of things we shouldn't do and makes a special place we will all burn in eteral fire if we don't do as he likes. Sounds like it's all based on worry to me.

TomTom

We Calvinists find such adverts highly bemusing.

The use of "probability" in place of "possibility" reflects the uncertain arrogance of those posting such messages.

In Christian theology such messages are anticipated Matt 10:33

But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.

Dennis

The reason they are trying so desperately to convince others that there is no God is because of their huge own self doubt. There is comfort in numbers.
And atheism offers no comfort in life and even less in death.
Funnily enough, their ad campaign has raised the level of debate and consciousness about God and it seems that Christianity will win more converts as a result. Certainly God is discussed more and more between my friends. I say let them carry on. God works in mysterious ways.

The Lavish Carbon Footprint

There's Probably No Such Thing as An Atheist in A Foxhole

Fraser Nelson

I prefer the piece of graffiti I saw written under this advert on my tube ride home:

Psalm 14:1 - The fool hath said in his heart there is no God

They didnt count on anyone saying there is "probably" no God, tho....

The Doctor

I'm still not sure why this campaign has come in for so much flack but the long-running and supremely tedious Alpha Course adverts are taken for granted.

Ray

"There's probably no God. But then again, what if...?"

hadrian

The Psalm Fraser cites is repeated almost word for word as Psalm 53- look it up! Which rather shows the significance the inspired writer saw in this assertion. It's not being gratuitously offensive- but making a solemn 'existential' point: if you rule out God you MUST be declaring life is essentially a huge cosmic joke and without purpose. Thus the innate foolishness/incoherence of the message in then counselling folk to get on with thngs and 'enjoy' it and stop worrying which implies these things have value. In a pointless universe they certainly don't, one state of existence is as 'good' as any other. Usual atheist trash, though a bit lackng in its equally usual arrogance!
I, as another calvinist on here, have no problem with such posters- except they should not be paid for by taxpayers, as the Trinitarian Bible Society has to shell out every penny itself.

AisA

What is it about atheists that so gets up religious people's noses? I thought that religion was supposed to promote charity, harmony and love, but these supposedly gentle, kindly people regularly call atheists ignorant, stupid, arrogant. You won't find many atheists stooping to such grubby tactics. And there's nothing arrogant about an absence of faith. It simply means you haven't bought the story. If you wish to believe the moon is made of green cheese, that is your prerogative, but believing it only makes it so for YOU, not for anyone else. Belief is personal, it is not objective truth, but if you want it, then go ahead, no atheist will call you nasty names. (Not in public anyway!)

Although there are degrees, in general an atheist simply says there really is no way of knowing, and that being the case, they use Occam's razor and make no assumptions beyond that which is most likely. That's all. What's the problem with that? Yes, my view is that life is in itself meaningless, but I bring meaning to it with my actions and through my relationships with family and friends. I have a rich and full life and I try to do no harm, all without belief. Believers do not have a monopoly on morality, and there is Good without God.

And by the way, all of you who try to taint atheism with dark talk of Hitler and Stalin, they were both ardent and devout Christians. Hitler a Catholic and Stalin Russian Orthodox. Most atrocious acts in the world have been committed by those in the grip of some belief system or other, you only have to read about Rev Jim Jones in Guyana, David Koresh at Waco, the Heaven's Gate cult and the countless tribal/religious horrors in Africa. Not to mention the IRA and now Islamist terrorists. All in the name of someone's god.

It may satisfy an infantile need for a comfort blanket at best, a smug "I'm alright Jack" in its insidious middle class incarnation and at its worst, it is pure mindless insanity. To me, I afraid it's simply irrelevant.

When you get so uptight about a simple little publicity stunt which will 'probably' be over very soon, I do worry about the foundations of your faith. Come on, join us - you know you want to really!

AisA

To Bruce Robertson and Tiberius:

a)There's no such thing as a "proselytising atheist" - it's a contradiction in terms. Religious people do that because they need to keep other believers on message - for some reason.

b)Atheists don't have 'convictions'. That's the point. We're not asking anyone to take anything on faith.

That's all.

JohnAnt

Enjoy your life. Ah yes. 'Sempre libera...' But the message has a self-defeating context: for I doubt any sane person would associate urban bus travel with enjoyment. It reminds most of us of the boredom of much of human existence and the hell of commuting. Oh dear, that word again, Dawkins forgive me.

Fergus Pickering

Peter McC, many a democratically elected leader, such as Hitler and Robert Mugabe say, has forced his people to do such things and worse. How does that make you feel about democracy? The God I favour, and almost sometimes believe in, is a nice chap. Yes really.

egh

Meanwhile, back at the Joyride Transport Company...

Terra firma

AisA says "Hitler and Stalin, were both ardent and devout Christians".

Phew! And there was me thinking...

TomTom

for so much flack

FLAK = Flugabwehrkanone = anti-aircraft fire

Good also to know the scoop about Hitler and Stalin - AisA is obviously a product of muddled historical facts - presumably unfamiliar with Marxism-Leninism or National Socialism in its core belief system....but maybe that is the returning Dark Ages propagated in State education as ideology

Verity

AisA writes: " I thought that religion was supposed to promote charity, harmony and love,". And which religion would that be, darling? Cuddly Islam?

Fergus Pickering

Since there are a couple of Calvinists here, could you explain for me the doctrine of election? It seems a terrible thing to me, as it did to Muriel Spark, James Hogg and Robert Louis Stevenson. But perhaps we are all in error. I now this is a bit off piste, but it is a matter of immortal souls, is it not?

Internet Troll Squad

Everyone, stop feeding the troll.
James Forsyth, stop being a troll

that is all

Wilhelm

Asia squeeeks ''There's no such thing as a "proselytising atheist''

Why is it then that bookish twit Richard Dorkins is always on television gushing about his atheism ?

Zesty Pete

I don't believe in god. I don't believe in a higher power. It has nothing to do with probability or possibility (or huge cosmic jokes for that matter). It has to do with personal belief. And I don't believe. With that in mind, I can no more convince someone else to stop believing than I can make myself believe. A bus ad isn't going to do anything in this regard, though it might serve to remind the believers that there are a helluva lot more of us non-believers out there than they imagine. Plus, Obama likes us. So there.

(Having said that, I think the second part of the Atheist Bus message is essentially a good idea. Plus: I like buses. SO it's a win-win from my point of view.)

Carniphage

If we want to be comforted, it is not difficult to construct comforting lies. Death is lovely. Goodness will be rewarded. Your invisible friend is everywhere.

But we know these are lies, because on each continent of the planet, a different lie was constructed.

The more comforting an idea is. The less likely it is to be true.

AisA

Tom-Tom:
"AisA is obviously a product of muddled historical facts - presumably unfamiliar with Marxism-Leninism or National Socialism in its core belief system..."

No, I am not muddled. You yourself use the relevant phrase - "belief-system". The whole hypocrisy of what eventually became communism is that one belief-system was simply switched for another. By forcing citizens to worship the state, leaders were trying to keep them "on message" - ie to control them. Marx's phrase about religion being "the opiate of the masses" was about religion giving people false comfort. However when Lenin and then Stalin subverted this into a blind worship of the State it became a powerful tool that they could use to subdue the masses. The leaders themselves practiced whatever religion they wanted. And they did.

Verity:
"And which religion would that be, darling? Cuddly Islam?"

Such sarcasm. If you'd taken the trouble to read the rest of my post, you would have perhaps noted the irony intended when I wrote "I thought that religion was supposed to promote charity, harmony and love".
I made it quite clear just what I do think about "cuddly islam", (and most other religions come to that) so it's best to read the post in its entirely before jumping to conclusions.

Damoclies

It's strange that everyone seems to be missing the important points of what the Atheist bus really means. It's not a sign of "directionless, spiritually bankrupt,(society) where the power of the state has permeated everything, that atheists feel they need to advertise, and then with such a drab, bland message." -biggestaspidistra
What it IS is a lightharted, and widespread attempt to show people there is an alternative to dogma, and that we are finally escaping the shackles that "Faith-with-a-capital-F" has held the great part of human society in for what is close to a mellinna. The goal isn't to convert, it's to help people understand that it's okay to listen to their own guiding voice. that it's okay to follow their own ideas of what is important in their life. That perhaps there is no fate, inexorably driving us towards heaven or hell.
I applaud the atheist bus movement because it is a sign that, for the first time, non belief is losing the stigma that nearly every major human organization has placed on it. The dividing lines that our need for god has drawn are (one hopes) beginning to fade. As we move closer and closer to a truly secular society (and we will have to, have no doubt.) we can begin making choices without the fear of a heavy, evangelizing hand on the tiller, imposing a narrow lock of morality upon us. We will be able to allow ethics rather then morals to guide us, and finally take another step towards the lofty goals of piece and unity.
"There is probably no god" is the only possible wording for the message because, of course, there is no way to prove his existence or absence. Absolutes are dogma, and that is one thing that anyone will avoid, if they truly hold self determination as the highest value in their lives. There is PROBABLY no god, because logic, reasoning and evidence free fear and outside pressures points overwhelmingly to his absence. But until each of us has answered the one question that everyone asks and everyone learns, I have no problem leaving the perfect certainty of Faith in the hands of those who need it more then I.
Will the hope of a secular world solve all of our problems? no, of course not. the question if who was religious and who was godless in the dark corners of history is a pointless one. Were great atrocities committed and WILL great atrocities yet still be preformed in the name of god? Yes, of course. And what would happen if suddenly tomorrow religions and beliefs vanished from the hearts and minds of men in what would be the ultimately ironic miracle?
We would go right on being horrible to each other.
It isn't our faiths that drive us, it's the fact that we are human. Christianity is founded on the idea that the meek and peaceful are to be commended, Islam is, form nearly every angle you examine it from, a tolerant and enlightened faith. But these two organizations (among many others) that look so good on their respective publications, have the disadvantage of being made up of flawed, fearful, superstitious, and largely ignorant humans. (which of course we all are, those traits by no means limited to the faithful.)
If religion did not exist, we would brutalize each other over some other matter. We would find some arbitrary line to draw in the sand, so we could point at the tribe at the other side in fear and condemnation.
Would the world be a better place without the need for organized religion? oh yes. would it be a perfect place without it? of course not.
THAT is the core of what I believe everyone should be aware of. That the world will only get better one person at a time, and it's pretty obvious which person each of us should take as their responsibility.

little notes here:

Psalm 14:1 - The fool hath said in his heart there is no God.
Fraser Nelson, if you read the new testament, Jesus himself says that those who call others fools deserve hell. He then of course goes on to call people fools at least twice....

Dan Poulton

Just to clarify, the atheist slogans (the 'probably' was only included because they weren't allowed to run the adverts with a flat-out negation of God)were a response to religious bus slogans warning of eternal damnation. I would call reassurance that hell doesn't exist pretty consoling myself. As for not meeting up with loved ones in heaven, nor will we ever be able to time travel or stop all pain and suffering. As rational adults, we just have to get over it.

SJG

hadrian writes:

"Thus the innate foolishness/incoherence of the message in then counselling folk to get on with thngs and 'enjoy' it and stop worrying which implies these things have value. In a pointless universe they certainly don't, one state of existence is as 'good' as any other. Usual atheist trash, though a bit lackng in its equally usual arrogance! "

I don't know, centuries of painstaking secular moral and political philosophical reasoning do seem to be at odds with the bland assertion that because your god didn't lay down the rules for good and bad there cannot be good and bad in society. Much of the more innocuous Christian morality tallies with non-religious moral philosophy, which has the frankly unbeatable advantage of being logical, rather than the result of someone thinking the big man upstairs told them some rules. It's massively, massively arrogant of people like you to pick a religion which makes you feel better (or worse, I don't know if you're a Catholic) and then adopt the posture of throwing out all the literature that has been pored over to improve the plight of man without regard to a deity.

People spout off about atheists necessarily leading empty, value-less lives. What you should be, in fact, is in awe of us being able to be moral and happy, contented or just plain alright in the face of the realisation that God isn't waiting to give us a cuddle or a slap on the wrist at the end of it all. There's a lot to be said for the notion that religious people are spiritually weaker than atheists since we're entirely self-reliant and you're, well, you're not, are you? You evidently need something to egg you on so you pick from the multitude of available religions, storing that faith in a part of your soul which I imagine is naturally some sort of hollow void, which is just sad.

bill

You would find it a great deal less odd if you knew who was paying for it. Its you actually - the British taxpayer to the tune of £35000

AisA

Wilhelm:
Goodness, was I squeeeking? (sic) I do apologise.
Richard Dawkins has made several programmes examining the atheist position. So what? There are many more pro-faith programmes in the schedules. Anyway "proselytise" is a religious term reserved for those who wish to convert others. Dawkins simply asks a lot of awkward questions to which there are usually no convincing answers.

AisA

Bill: £35000 is nothing compared to the vast amounts that the atheist taxpayer has to pour into the coffers for faith schools.

Wilhelm

Asia drones

''Dicky Dorkins asks awkward questions ''

EH ? now your just being silly, son.

AisA

Wilhelm:

Your constant taking issue with me just illustrates my original point. Atheists - they really bug you!

Ad it's not Asia, mate. The name's 'A is A' - from Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged.

Fergus Pickering

But Aisa, faitj schools educate children They are not any more expensive than the non-faith kind and the children have to go somewhere. In fact they CROWD into the faith schools because, as a rule, they are better. What do I mean by better? Better at educating is what I mean.

hadrian

'''All the literature to improve the plight of man.'
I don't know, centuries of this illogical, incoherent, unfounded, meaningless nonsense that even the most basic moral philosophy student should be getting correct- you do NOT get 'ought' from 'is' if your universe is ultimately impersonal. Without a theistic base 'good' and 'bad' have no meaning- they are simply modes of existence. The deepest philosophers have faced this..old Bertrand Russell amongst them in a famously doom laden but searingly honest passage on the true outlook for the consistent atheist.
For one atheist to tell another atheist what is 'right' or 'wrong' or how to 'improve' is simply risible.
As for atheists being 'nice' and never offending in the least against any christian or secular ideology they happen not to share, I suggest you look at some of the things the likes of Dawkins gets away with in his rages.
Finally, we are led to believe atheists don't prosyletise. Funny- I saw it day in day out in the schools I taught in where atheist teachers instilled in their pupils all their Sixties rebellion/permissive values, which regretfully for our nation, now have an ascendancy that is destroying us from within.
And I am most certainly NOT a Roman Catholic. I mentioned in my last post that I am a Calvinist which is vastly removed from Roman Catholicism.

AisA

Hadrian - how on earth would you know anything about how an atheist views existence? All your blather is total rubbish. If it was that bleak for atheists, then every one of us would immediately commit suicide rather than face the 'emptiness', or we'd all be out murdering at random and eating babies because we can't tell right from wrong.

Of course non-believers are as prone do doing bad stuff as any other human being. That's pretty evenly spread out across the human species regardless of creed, colour or race. As I said before, but you don't seem to be able to understand - there IS good without god. Millions of good, kind and compassionate atheists are testament to that.

Simon Gardner

Bruce Robertson Wrote: "Bit wimpish for proselytising atheists!" So what on earth is a 'proselytising atheist' then?

AisA

Damoclies:

Amen to that!!

AisA

Hadrian - how on earth would you know anything about how an atheist views existence? All your blather is total rubbish. If it was that bleak for atheists, then every one of us would immediately commit suicide rather than face the 'emptiness', or we'd all be out murdering at random and eating babies because we can't tell right from wrong.

Of course non-believers are as prone do doing bad stuff as any other human being. That's pretty evenly spread out across the human species regardless of creed, colour or race. As I said before, but you don't seem to be able to understand - there IS good without god. Millions of good, kind and compassionate atheists are testament to that.

Elan

AisA - You sound like an intelligent chap, so allow me to tender an argument as to why us "religious types" get so uppity when encountering ateheists.

Most self-professed atheists are actually not atheists; they are ignorant. If they were challenged and had it explained to them, they would readily admit that they are in actualit fact agnostics, for an agnostic is one who believes that there is no God until His existence can be either proved or disproved. This is a far more rational approach than that of an atheist who arrogantly denies the existence of God.

Yes, I used arrogantly, and with some justification: an atheist is fooling himself when he says that he knows that God does not exist, he can't *know* any such thing more than he can prove that if I were to tell him that a chair that I tell him exists in Sydney, Australia and he were to attempt to disprove it. It's impossible to disprove the existence of something that might exist in an infinite universe; the chances are heavily in favour of such a thing existing, if anything.

(And in case you start to say that we are arrogant for believing that God does exist and trumpeting as much; well, I actually agree with you. Many religious people have an over-inflated sense of ego and ill-gotten sense of superiority. My religion on the other hand, actually bars proseltysing. It would seem that my religion is not so bloody arrogant :D)

AisA

Elan:
I make no claims whatsoever about the existence of god. Those who believe in it, do.

I haven't come across many atheists who categorically deny the existence of god. Even Richard Dawkins doesn't do that (as he states in 'The God Delusion') and yes that would be a pretty arrogant position.

For me, until there's evidence, I don't see the point, and so that's how I live my life, and I call myself atheist, because I am a-theist, without god.

Actually, though, to take your argument to its logical conclusion, we're all agnostics really - believers, non-believers and everything in between, because NO ONE knows. We just have to choose whether or not to take it on faith - and some do and some don't.

Anyway I tend to take a pretty live-and-let-live attitude to religious people, so long as they treat me the same way. It sounds as if you're much the same - I think we would get on famously :)