(July 3, 2011 at 1:02 pm)reverendjeremiah Wrote:

(July 2, 2011 at 10:00 pm)Minimalist Wrote: I'm not so sure that we are a first world country any more.

I feel the same way

First world country simply implies being aligned with the USA's interests. Oh wait, I see your point.

Regarding the OP:

If I was a pilot, I'd still fly them in a heartbeat.

Although I do despise the hypocrisy of god's tolerance and love, threats more often than not are just that - threats.

Yeah, christians are assholes but it's a tiny and rare percent that are actually going to kill anyone (referencing the bullet proof vest comment in the article) over a banner. Not to say that religious nut-jobs don't exist, but most christians just want to make noise and come off looking like devout defenders of the faith in front of their own people.

#1. One would have to hang out at an airfield all day just to find out who the pilot actually is and than follow him home in his ford. Very suspicious and unlikely.
#2. Also very unlikely - someone is going to be willing to take a pot-shot from the ground with a rifle. It's very likely these planes would be flying over populated areas and the risk of getting caught would be too great.
#3. Anyone who actually knows the pilots is also going to know that they're just doing a job for a client and that any offense against them is a pointless waste of effort.

All these factors combined would make the odds of a pilot getting killed or even harmed over such a matter EXTREMELY low. Not impossible ... but low.

I'd chalk this particular pilot's concerns over his personal safety up to an exaggeration of his plight. (no pun intended ) As much as I hate Christians, I still think the whole thing seems a little over-dramatic. Yeah, bible thumpers are assholes, but only nut-jobs are randomly killing people.

(July 6, 2011 at 1:06 pm)Cinjin Wrote:

---

Regarding the OP:

If I was a pilot, I'd still fly them in a heartbeat.

Although I do despise the hypocrisy of god's tolerance and love, threats more often than not are just that - threats.

Yeah, christians are assholes but it's a tiny and rare percent that are actually going to kill anyone (referencing the bullet proof vest comment in the article) over a banner. Not to say that religious nut-jobs don't exist, but most christians just want to make noise and come off looking like devout defenders of the faith in front of their own people.

#1. One would have to hang out at an airfield all day just to find out who the pilot actually is and than follow him home in his ford. Very suspicious and unlikely.
#2. Also very unlikely - someone is going to be willing to take a pot-shot from the ground with a rifle. It's very likely these planes would be flying over populated areas and the risk of getting caught would be too great.
#3. Anyone who actually knows the pilots is also going to know that they're just doing a job for a client and that any offense against them is a pointless waste of effort.

All these factors combined would make the odds of a pilot getting killed or even harmed over such a matter EXTREMELY low. Not impossible ... but low.

I'd chalk this particular pilot's concerns over his personal safety up to an exaggeration of his plight. (no pun intended ) As much as I hate Christians, I still think the whole thing seems a little over-dramatic. Yeah, bible thumpers are assholes, but only nut-jobs are randomly killing people.

---

Right, I think the pilots, however, were afraid of religious nut-jobs. What you have posted makes sense if one is being rational. When have theists ever been known to act rational, especially when their monopoly on religious messages is threatened? Sure, they only have a few nut-jobs to worry about, but people can do dangerous and crazy things in defense of their god, so just a few nut-jobs is scary enough. I'm not saying the pilots were right by not flying, but the reasons you have posted for why it would not be dangerous assume that everyone offended by the message would put rational thought into their reaction.

---

I am all for people standing up to bullies, but I'm sure most of the pilots who refused to fly saw it that way. A lot of them were probably Christian and didn't see the risk being worth the reward. Next time, we should get all atheist pilots who agree to fly ahead of time in full knowledge of the threats that might come.

On this one I have to side with Epimethean’s wise words ….
“If you don't fight it, you accept it.”

On another atheist site one of the Mods (an American) list one of his aims as trying to keep religion out of the legislature ,he then posts questions as to how he should respond when his religious relations say grace when they are eating in his house knowing his views. He does not want to risk ill feeling within the family.
How he expects to keep religion out of government when he can’t or won’t keep it out of his own house ,I’m not quite sure.

OK guys , Im not trying to be confrontational here ….but ,I just have to ask.

“Is this a sort of Atheist Lite ? “
“DeCaf Godlessness.”
“I’m an Atheist …. if that’s OK with every body?”

And if this is the case how (if at all) do you see atheism advancing in the U.S.?

(July 6, 2011 at 4:28 pm)Watchman Wrote: “Is this a sort of Atheist Lite ? “
“DeCaf Godlessness.”
“I’m an Atheist …. if that’s OK with every body?”

What actions are you referring to as 'Atheist Lite?' If you mean the pilots chickening out we don't know for a fact that they were atheists in the first place.

Watchman Wrote:And if this is the case how (if at all) do you see atheism advancing in the U.S.?

Very slowly.

A worrisome argument I recently read about the I Amendment establishment clause (Congress shall make no law establishing religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof) is that because atheism is not a religion by its own claim, nothing prohibits Government from enacting regulations about it, or against it.

I guess Wicca is safe (not) but if such an argument were to gain currency, I can see some trying to outlaw atheism. Not suppress it or belittle it, but outlaw it.

Actually, for legal purposes the Supreme Court has deemed atheism a religion and therefore qualifies for all freedoms that accompany that.

damned activist judges!

(July 6, 2011 at 5:39 pm)FaithNoMore Wrote: Actually, for legal purposes the Supreme Court has deemed atheism a religion and therefore qualifies for all freedoms that accompany that.

Well then, if lacking belief in one imaginary friend counts as a religion then it looks like we each are a member to many thousands of religions. Millions even.

Talk about an epic fail in thought. When you turn one thing that makes complete sense into complete nonsense, suddenly nothing makes sense. Only a fool of epic proportions could fuck things up that badly.

(July 6, 2011 at 5:53 pm)Ace Otana Wrote: Talk about an epic fail in thought. When you turn one thing that makes complete sense into complete nonsense, suddenly nothing makes sense. Only a fool of epic proportions could fuck things up that badly.

You are talking about the Supreme Court.