Saturday, May 9, 2009 | Reason : In the News | print version

Print | Comments |

Bloomington Rejects 'You Can Be Good Without God'; Lawsuit Underway

Indiana Atheist Bus Campaign

eobanb sent this in the other day and I suggested posting as an addition to the post on the Spanish Atheist Bus Campaign which he did but this issue is now getting more publicity and hopefully the lawsuit will lead to a favorable outcome.
/Mike

Reposted from
http://inatheistbus.org/2009/05/05/bloomington-rejects-you-can-be-good-without-god-lawsuit-underway

Bloomington was first on the Indiana Atheist Bus Campaign’s list of places it hoped to run bus ads. However, the city has rejected our campaign’s slogan, ‘You Can Be Good Without God.’ This is deeply disappointing to our campaign’s members; we all love Bloomington and were very much hoping to run ads in our hometown along with many other cities.

Following their rejection of our ad’s slogan, Bloomington Transit referenced their ad policy, which currently states that they may reject any ad they feel is ‘too controversial.’

However, we are not giving up. Today the ACLU of Indiana, on behalf of the campaign, is filing a lawsuit against Bloomington Transit on First Amendment grounds. No campaign donations will be spent on the suit.

Here is the filed complaint (PDF, 172 KB)

Here is the press release(RTF, 4.4 KB)
Meanwhile, we are moving forward with efforts in other cities, and we will be announcing more very soon. We want to bring our message many places, and this rejection motivates us more. If you’re like us and want to see a positive message about atheism in your community, please donate. We still have a long way to go, and you can help us get there!

Posted: Saturday, May 9, 2009 | Permalink

Comments 1 - 50 of 71 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #374585 by Sigmund on May 9, 2009 at 9:20 pm

I would be interested to know if the city in question has a blanket policy against any sort of religious or political statements on its buses. If it bans all of these then their current stance is understandable. Perhaps some locals who are reading can answer this one.

Other Comments by Sigmund

2. Comment #374586 by Rodger T on May 9, 2009 at 9:30 pm

Come and see the repression inherent in the system.

Getting the message banned got it on to the news ,2 mins free advertising at primetime ,cool.

How was that fuckin` moron ,"no, you can`t be good without god."

Other Comments by Rodger T

3. Comment #374587 by RightWingAtheist on May 9, 2009 at 9:35 pm

How much would it cost to rent our own buses and drive them around town? Probably too much. Just thinking.

Then we could skip the nice stuff, and do something like "Mohammed was a rapist and Jesus was a retard."

Other Comments by RightWingAtheist

4. Comment #374591 by BracesForImpact on May 9, 2009 at 9:57 pm

Until recently, I lived 20 miles or so north of Bloomington. Indiana is by far the most southern-like northern state I've ever encountered. I have lived below the bible belt as well, and in a lot of ways, Indiana is far worse when it comes to discrimination against non-believers. Bloomington is home to IU, and is about as free thinking an area as the state is ever going to get. Good luck on their law suit.

Other Comments by BracesForImpact

5. Comment #374596 by kram50 on May 9, 2009 at 10:16 pm

RightWingAtheist

I like that one, had a good laugh.

We could add...Ted Haggard is the Devil.

Other Comments by kram50

6. Comment #374597 by mordacious1 on May 9, 2009 at 10:18 pm

If the policy is "nothing too controversial" then that could eliminate any advertisement. Burger King can't put up an ad because fast food is controversial. This policy gives a group of possibly small-minded individuals the ability to stop any ad. I think the ACLU has a strong case.

Other Comments by mordacious1

7. Comment #374598 by ksskidude on May 9, 2009 at 10:20 pm

Did anyone get the link to be able to chime in our opinions? How about the fat bus driver who doesn't think you can be good without god? What a moron! It astounds me that these people can't take a step back for one moment and think about what it says, "You can be good without god." It is very simple, the answer is yes you can.

Other Comments by ksskidude

8. Comment #374600 by Silvia on May 9, 2009 at 10:23 pm

What I find most absurd in this case is that the advertisement was quite mild and totally uncontroversial. It wasn't really a propaganda for atheism, but a sort of self-defense. Atheists are just saying "Hey we can be good too". They are not even affirming they are all good or that the theist aren't good, they are just defending themselves from all the accusations of being immoral and bad and things like that.

But the comments I've seen about this fail to mention that and speak of it as if it were really a matter of advertising an idea or a way of thinking. It is not.

Other Comments by Silvia

9. Comment #374602 by markg on May 9, 2009 at 10:29 pm

ksskidude,

Did anyone get the link to be able to chime in our opinions?

Here it is: http://www.theindychannel.com/index.html

Down toward the bottom of the page is the 6News Talkback poll.

edit- I just voted in the poll and the 1st choice was leading with 86% of votes. I checked Pharyngula and it was posted there this morning, which explains the 86%.

Other Comments by markg

10. Comment #374605 by Ohnhai on May 9, 2009 at 10:46 pm

'You Can Be Good Without Thor'
'You Can Be Good Without Mithras'
'You Can Be Good Without Zeus'
'You Can Be Good Without Zemu'
'You Can Be Good Without God'
'You Can Be Good Without ...

Maybe it the wording? How about...

"Deistic tenancies are not a pre-requisite for ethical behaviour"

Other Comments by Ohnhai

11. Comment #374608 by sterski on May 9, 2009 at 10:58 pm

you know what? I actually agree with their decision. What makes me proud of being an Atheist is the fact that we are not actively going out trying to change peoples minds. Atheism is a lifestyle CHOICE that a person arrives at through their own personal voyage - not through an advertising campaign on the side of a smelly bus. I would be equally upset seeing ads for Christianity or Islam slapped on the side of the buses riding around my city. Lead by example I sPr

Other Comments by sterski

12. Comment #374612 by Old Sarum on May 9, 2009 at 11:04 pm

11. Comment #374608 by sterski

I fully agree.

(See, I do sometimes agree with other posters :))

Other Comments by Old Sarum

13. Comment #374613 by Bonzai on May 9, 2009 at 11:09 pm

OS

You may find the ad distasteful, but that is a freedom of speech issue. If they allow religion to advertise, it is only fair they should also allow atheistic messages.

Other Comments by Bonzai

14. Comment #374614 by Old Sarum on May 9, 2009 at 11:12 pm

You may find the ad distasteful, but that is a freedom of speech issue.

No, sides of buses are not venues for free speech, any more than sides of buildings are. These matters are legitimately controlled by various regulatory bodies. There's a fine line between advertising and graffiti.

Other Comments by Old Sarum

15. Comment #374615 by Bonzai on May 9, 2009 at 11:14 pm

Well do you consider religious messages on a bus advertisment or graffitti?

Scribing things on bathroom wall is grafftii and you don't pay to do that,--unless you are caught and get fined.

Other Comments by Bonzai

16. Comment #374616 by Old Sarum on May 9, 2009 at 11:17 pm

Well do you consider religious messages on a bus advertisment or graffitti?

I'd rather not see any such material on the sides of buses, and I don't like to see the atheist/theist debate reduced to slogans. It all becomes a very unedifying "is not!" "is too!" shouting match.

Other Comments by Old Sarum

17. Comment #374618 by Bonzai on May 9, 2009 at 11:24 pm

I'd rather not see any such material on the sides of buses,

That's fine. If they rule that there should no advertisment of any kind I would have no objection. But if they only disallow athiest ads it is discrimination. This is wrong whether you like the message or the advertising campaign or not.

Other Comments by Bonzai

18. Comment #374619 by Old Sarum on May 9, 2009 at 11:30 pm

But if they only disallow athiest ads it is discrimination. This is wrong whether you like the message or the advertising campaign or not.

Not necessarily. They might just regard atheist messages as being more controversial (in the sense of being more likely to lead to complaints by upset people) than religious messages, in which case it's an understandable decision. But I'd prefer them to scrap all religious/anti-religious messages. The sides of buses are really not suitable vehicles for ontological debate :)

Other Comments by Old Sarum

19. Comment #374621 by Bonzai on May 9, 2009 at 11:32 pm

They might just regard atheist messages as being more controversial (in the sense of being more likely to lead to complaints by upset people) than religious messages, in which case it's an understandable decision.

That is probably the reason behind the decision, but it is still discrimination. If you allow one side you have to allow the other side as well.

Other Comments by Bonzai

20. Comment #374622 by Old Sarum on May 9, 2009 at 11:37 pm

That is probably the reason behind the decision, but it is still discrimination. If you allow one side you have to allow the other side as well.

I'd imagine the transit authority feels no obligation to get involved in the discussion at all. They're running buses, not chairing a debate.

Other Comments by Old Sarum

21. Comment #374623 by Bonzai on May 9, 2009 at 11:39 pm

If they don't want any discussion they can either run the ad or have a policy that disallows all religious ads.

Other Comments by Bonzai

22. Comment #374624 by Old Sarum on May 9, 2009 at 11:41 pm

While I support that as the best option, I can't say I'm at all bothered about atheist bus slogans being banned, whether or not religious ones are as well.

Other Comments by Old Sarum

23. Comment #374625 by Bonzai on May 9, 2009 at 11:42 pm

Then you are adopting a double standard.

Other Comments by Bonzai

24. Comment #374626 by Old Sarum on May 9, 2009 at 11:43 pm

No, I'm just saying that I regard the matter as trivial.

Other Comments by Old Sarum

25. Comment #374629 by Sigmund on May 9, 2009 at 11:52 pm

How about "You can be God without being good"?

Other Comments by Sigmund

26. Comment #374630 by kram50 on May 9, 2009 at 11:58 pm

Sterski

Unfortunately, too, too many are not able to make a lifestyle choice because their personal voyage has been highjacked at an early age, and you know how deluded the thinking becomes...it's not easy for most to engage in critical thinking after their path in life is clouded by untruths.

I have no problem with bus adds,..all of them have been mild and harmless. I think it is not enough actually.
Of course my point of view is fueled by an overwhelming desire to shed the world of the biggest scam in the history of humanity, before the fundies do any more damage to MY and MY KIDS' world.

Other Comments by kram50

27. Comment #374631 by andersemil on May 10, 2009 at 12:07 am

Couldn't we say it's a psychiatrist's warning?

Religion kills.
Religious worship while you're pregnant can damage your child.
Religion is bad for your health.

Other Comments by andersemil

28. Comment #374632 by Verylee on May 10, 2009 at 12:10 am

Well I guess by rejecting the bus slogan, Bloomington is 'raising the consciousness' in other ways that it hadn't foreseen. Hopefully there will be a lot of media interest in the lawsuit.
Atheism isn't just for intellectuals to debate ad nauseum, it affects real life situations, in work, politics etc. Hopefully these campaigns will make people think about their stance and behaviour, much as the 'Gay Pride' campaigns did for Gays.

Other Comments by Verylee

29. Comment #374634 by epeeist on May 10, 2009 at 12:11 am

Comment #374608 by sterski:

What makes me proud of being an Atheist is the fact that we are not actively going out trying to change peoples minds.

Who says the advertisements are there to convert people? The ones here in the UK were produced, as much as anything, to remind people that there are other choices. The messages in other countries seem to be similar, there to make people think.

Atheism is a lifestyle CHOICE that a person arrives at through their own personal voyage

Agreed, and as I say, the adverts are there to show that such a choice exists.

Other Comments by epeeist

30. Comment #374636 by kram50 on May 10, 2009 at 12:30 am

Old Sarum

The adds alone may be a little unedifying, but if the result is an increasing dialog (I do believe there is), then it is worth the effort. We have gone way past the point of "is to", "is not" long ago..this is evident in the many debates, videos, news items, interviews, etc...both sides giving their argument/evidence. It continues....

A new enlightenment is worth an add here and there.

Other Comments by kram50

31. Comment #374638 by Rowdy1 on May 10, 2009 at 1:24 am

Bloomington Transit referenced their ad policy, which currently states that they may reject any ad they feel is ‘too controversial.’

Too controversial£!£!£ I'd love to see a list of ads they have approved.

What century is this that "You can be good without God" is TOO CONTROVERSIAL£

Other Comments by Rowdy1

32. Comment #374639 by Jeff D on May 10, 2009 at 1:27 am

Regarding Braces for Impact's Comment 374591,

I've lived in Indiana since 1994 after 8.5 years in N.Y.C., and I lived in Bloomington for 3 years during law school in the late 1970s. I travel regularly throughout Indiana and deal with lawyers and non-lawyers all over the state. Culturally, the southern half of Indiana (the part below U.S. Highway 40, which runs through Indianapolis) is definitely Bible Belt country, and is more like Kentucky or Tennessee than an area north of the Mason-Dixon Line.

"20 miles north of Bloomington" would probably be in Morgan County, which is -- forgive me -- about as redneck a territory as one can find anywhere in Indiana.

Bloomington was probably the best Indiana city to pick to run this bus ad campaign because as a city, Bloomington is one of the most "liberal" and cosmopolitan of any town in Indiana, and its population is probably in the top 3 or 4 Indiana cities in terms of median years of adult educational attainment. Maybe this was Braces for Impact's point.

But the Transit Authority personnel are perhaps more representative of the Bible-thumping, no-nothing residents of the surrounding county.

Other Comments by Jeff D

33. Comment #374642 by Enlightenme.. on May 10, 2009 at 1:44 am

Should one cease to believe; should one cease to behave?

Other Comments by Enlightenme..

34. Comment #374658 by Stafford Gordon on May 10, 2009 at 2:25 am

They are so backward; the first thing Bloomington and towns like it should do is legislate for improving education.

The woman on the bus appears to have had her self esteem removed or bypassed; most probably by the religious beliefs of her parents; doubtless she'll repeat the process with her own offspring.

She needs to learn that she's innately good and has no need of superstition; she, and others like her, really are in need that bus advert!

Other Comments by Stafford Gordon

35. Comment #374672 by black wolf on May 10, 2009 at 2:51 am

Please understand, this slogan is deeply hurtful to the Perfect Almighty One. He might throw his wrath on the town, just because of letting these atheists go unsuppressed. He's just Supreme and Loving like that. Submit and serve. Be good like the wicked depraved wretches you are. Because only wallowing in self-abasement is the road to virtue and goodness. Not that you could ever be good anyway, but you'll get your righteous punishment for not grovelling the way He demands. Because he is Perfectly Good and Just and Merciful. Fear the Lord. Buy His Book.

ABORTION ABORTION ABORTION

You will be sorry. You have been warned.

I'll pray for you.

In His Love,
/end of

Other Comments by black wolf

36. Comment #374674 by Peacebeuponme on May 10, 2009 at 2:54 am

sterski

you know what? I actually agree with their decision. What makes me proud of being an Atheist is the fact that we are not actively going out trying to change peoples minds. Atheism is a lifestyle CHOICE that a person arrives at through their own personal voyage - not through an advertising campaign on the side of a smelly bus.

I'm sorry, but this is nonsense.

Atheism is far from a choice for many people, who have grown up with religious indoctrination, without ever hearing much of the other side.

Religion gets a free ride on all important matters of public opinion, with Archbishops, Popes, Imams and the like having the full weight of the national and world media at their disposal to comment on just about any issue they fancy from a religious point of view. Well meaning atheists on the other hand are only supposed to speak when they are spoken to?

Bonzai

I'd rather not see any such material on the sides of buses,
That's fine. If they rule that there should no advertisment of any kind I would have no objection.

You should. So long as a slogan is not factually incorrect, or gratuitously offensive, then why should the state stick its nose in? We are talking about a private contract between a bus company and a concerned citizen. Whatever they want to present, so long as it breaks no laws, and meets the above conditions, is no business for the State.

Old Sarum

I find the way you are dealt with by some other posters rather distasteful, but you do talk a lot of old bollocks. This thread is a shining example. That you consider something trivial, and are therefore willing to suspend any sense of fair play and liberty, I find amongst the most objectionable things ever posted here.

One does also have to wonder at the motive behind a "mild mannered" atheist posting a comment so perfectly in opposition to the promotion of atheism, on an atheistic message board. Particularly on an issue that person has admitted to consider trivial.

Other Comments by Peacebeuponme

37. Comment #374675 by DamnDirtyApe on May 10, 2009 at 2:58 am

I was suprised how many supportive folks were in that newspiece.

Other Comments by DamnDirtyApe

38. Comment #374680 by kev_s on May 10, 2009 at 3:05 am

Dan Dennett in a recent talk mentioned on this site showed a photo from outside a church that had this slogan, "Good minus God = 0". (Good eh?)
I'm afraid that if this particular atheist slogan goes ahead the buses will next carry that poisonous "Good minus God = 0" meme and in my opinion it 'trumps' the atheist message because in this genre it simply better, cleverer, cuter. I support the atheist bus campaign but this slogan plays into the enemy's hands.

Other Comments by kev_s

39. Comment #374682 by Chris Davis on May 10, 2009 at 3:06 am

Ouch! From the Bus Campaign legal complaint:

24. Exclusion of INABC's advertisement is causing the organization harm in that its essential goal is to place advertisements on buses to promote its beliefs.

(my italics)

IANAL, but can't help wondering if that last phrase doesn't muddy the waters somewhat. It implies an unspoken agenda for the campaign, which the bus co might be able to point to in support of their 'controversy' theory.

It could be argued, after all, that the campaign's essential goal is to place adverts on busses, and that's what's being thwarted. Is the 'promotion of beliefs' bit necessary?

Other Comments by Chris Davis

40. Comment #374685 by Chris Davis on May 10, 2009 at 3:18 am

@38. Comment #374680 by kev_s

As the video makes clear, there are some morons who do still believe that morality requires a deity. Some subset of those will never change their minds.

But some of them, I suspect, may simply never have examined the proposition. And if they do, they might see the weakness of it.

These people are the target of the campaign. The purpose is to make those who can think, do so.

Other Comments by Chris Davis

41. Comment #374697 by rod-the-farmer on May 10, 2009 at 3:50 am

Re 11. Comment #374608 by sterski

you know what? I actually agree with their decision. What makes me proud of being an Atheist is the fact that we are not actively going out trying to change peoples minds.

Speak for yourself. At least some of us are actively trying to change the minds of people we meet. If you are a regular follower of this site, you will no doubt remember that a number of people who came across things like the bus adverts say "All my life I never knew there was a group of people near me who do not believe in god. I am going to find out all I can about them, and maybe join."

And THAT is what the bus adverts do.....increase awareness. Pretty mild stuff. Yet the faith heads still object.

Other Comments by rod-the-farmer

42. Comment #374711 by gcdavis on May 10, 2009 at 4:29 am

When the UK bus campaign started and there was opposition to it by religious groups I created some alternative biblically inspired ads and asked the UK Advertising Authority to see if they were acceptable. They have been very reluctant to offer a definitive opinion. Click on the link and you will see why.
http://www.e-design.to/atheism/truebible.jpg

Other Comments by gcdavis

43. Comment #374734 by bethe123 on May 10, 2009 at 5:37 am

sterski--

"Atheism is a lifestyle CHOICE that a person arrives at through their own personal voyage "

That is absurd.

I thought the decision was a rational one based on reason and evidence.

Do you also think the decision to believe 2 plus 2 = 4 is a lifestyle choice?

Other Comments by bethe123

44. Comment #374736 by Bonzai on May 10, 2009 at 5:42 am

bethe123

Thanks for the blackhole book suggestion last night.

Other Comments by Bonzai

45. Comment #374741 by Roland_F on May 10, 2009 at 6:05 am

Comment #374674 by Peacebeuponme : Old Sarum. I find the way you are dealt with by some other posters rather distasteful, but you do talk a lot of old bollocks.

I also find some ad hominine attacks yesterday, and was first surprised why, however after a couple of post today, propagating a theist and even more continuously apologizing supernaturalist agenda, I start to understand why he is drawing a lot of opposition.

Comment #374360 by Old Sarum : a sound science education inevitably represents an indoctrination into atheism£ The answer is "yes", but this depends on the premise
Comment #374548 by Old Sarum : We could encourage scientists and science educators to appreciate the importance of a reasonable cultural accommodation with non-scientific ways of thinking . . . . We could try to ensure that the role of science in general education is kept minimal enough to avoid such monocultural impositions.
Comment #374555 by Old Sarum recognise that there's ample room within the broader culture (including the broader academic culture) for both science and non-scientific perspectives.
Comment #374560 by Old Sarum: they really just reinforce the widespread perception that the New Atheism is a dangerous supremacist movement that needs to be resisted by people who value cultural freedom.

Accomodating supernaturalism in science, keep science minimal as not to harm religious feelings, shut up and stay in your closet to avoid that ‘New atheism’ is considered from theists as a dangerous movement etc . . . .
A lot of posters here on this forum are fed up with this advance capitulation in front of superstitious fairy tales spreaders, and we were long enough the silent majority bullied by religiots who have a say in every political discussion, every ethical board, sometimes unelected to parliament and so on.
And some people might react allergic to see postings like “we atheist should not do this”, “I am atheist but” followed by apologist statements which could come from Dinesh D’Souza.

Other Comments by Roland_F

46. Comment #374764 by asyouwere on May 10, 2009 at 6:55 am

The religious are justifiably concerned that their “Free Pass” card on thought and custom might one day be issued to non-believers and therefore disallow any controversy over their views as well.

That would be the day when an evangelical or a LDS would spot an atheistic message on a bus and simply roll his eyes and tsk-tsk instead of getting their panties up in a knot and bruising at the hideous insult of it all.

Other Comments by asyouwere

47. Comment #374774 by AfraidToDie on May 10, 2009 at 7:43 am

First, if they allow any religious quotes (or have in the past), it is just too obviously illegal to not allow this ad. While waiting for litigation, what about trying an ad to join the Indiana Atheist group with their website (no slogan, no controversy)? I agree wholeheartedly that the value of these bus campaigns is awareness, and lets people who have doubt know they are not alone. That is very important! Perhaps they should also try to put the slogan on billboards?

Other Comments by AfraidToDie

48. Comment #374779 by Mbee on May 10, 2009 at 7:54 am

I think the bus add is great. Yes it should be allowed because it increases awareness and it does not knock religion. If it makes you think, what is wrong with that!

It appears to be a mainstay of the religious that you 'DO' have to believe in their god to be good. That is simply not true. There are plenty of 'good' atheists. Their claim for this to be true is just one more example of lying for jesus.

Other Comments by Mbee

49. Comment #374785 by Sally Luxmoore on May 10, 2009 at 8:03 am

Now 87% in favour of allowing the ad.

http://cf.theindychannel.com/ind/sh/con_surveycontest_display/displaySurveyResults.cfm?contentid=19409260&sitekey=IND&questionum=1&answer1=1

Keep voting!

Other Comments by Sally Luxmoore

50. Comment #374789 by nalfeshnee on May 10, 2009 at 8:15 am

Peacebeuponme wrote:

So long as a slogan is not factually incorrect, or gratuitously offensive, then why should the state stick its nose in? We are talking about a private contract between a bus company and a concerned citizen. Whatever they want to present, so long as it breaks no laws, and meets the above conditions, is no business for the State.

Indeed. This is seen most clearly in the non-success of the "atheist bus campaign" here in my adopted country of Germany, where the urban bus companies are state-run, and yet not a single one of them has so far agreed to run the campaign.

People often cite Europe as "god-free", "secular", and so forth. It's not everywhere -- certainly for Germany, "accommodationist" would be a much more accurate word to use.

And the degree of non-accommodation of overt secular values is worrying in that respect.

A selection of five refusal criteria from the European country of Germany (from http://www.buskampagne.de/?page_id=28#17):

Bremen (where Becks beer is brewed): refused, they didn't want any controversies shortly before the Evangelical Church Festival (20-24 May, 2009). Note that Bremen Airport kindly sponsored a bus for the Festival: http://www.kirchentag.de/aktuell/nachrichten/flughafenbus.html (!!!)

Dortmund: refused, described as "blasphemous" (I kid you not)

Hamburg: refused, because they "must stay neutral". And yet there are allegedly plenty of religious ads allowed all the time on the metro in Hamburg...

Essen: first they agreed, and then they revoked the permission, saying that they had had "massive protests from customers". Even though the fact of their agreement hadn't actually been given much attention in the media. However, they -- thoughtfully -- had previously asked religious "leaders" if they found it OK. Freedom of speech 101 that ain't.

Berlin: refused, no religious advertising. Was pointed out that they had previously allowed advertising for "pro reli" (search on this site!). They then rephrased the refusal: "no religious advertising FROM NOW ON". You can't make this up!

Next time someone suggests Europe is full of secular countries, I suggest you point them to Scandinavia. At least until the bus campaign grinds to a halt there, too.

Other Comments by nalfeshnee

Reload Comments | Back to Top

More Comments: 1 2 | Next | Last