Atheist Murals on Bloomington Buses

[bogus]

I found this in the online version of the Columbus newspaper "The Republic" today. Personally, this both infuriates and deeply saddens me. This is becoming such a common theme. I understand there are those who will totally disagree with me. That's fine. To each his own. Man, it sure is becoming harder for me to swallow though...


Obviously this is a very touchy subject. I posted mainly as an FYI. If a discussion should arise, please discuss politely.



"Atheist group wins approval to put murals on Bloomington buses

Wire Reports

BLOOMINGTON - An atheist group can post "You can be good without God" ads on Bloomington city buses.

An agreement announced Monday evening at the Bloomington Public Transportation Corporation's building ends a federal lawsuit filed in May by the Indiana Atheist Bus Campaign.

The Herald-Times of Bloomington says the agreement allows the group to pay standard rate for the ads, which they can post as often, and on as many buses, as they choose.

The transit corporation also agreed to reimburse the ACLU-Indiana for a significant portion of their legal expenses. The transit corporation previously said the proposed ads violated its advertising policy, which bans statements for or against "controversial public issues."

Transit corporation officials were not immediately available for comment."

 

[RachelMarie]

More than anything...this is just sad!

 

[chraland51]

It is really sickening to me also. I am not a deeply religious person, but it is very concerning that an athiest group would make such an effort and go to such great expense. The involvement of the ACLU is, however, no surprise as their origins came from defending communists many years ago. Maybe the communists were being overly scutinized and persecuted. I do not know. I was not paying much attention to such things back then.

 

[ATF Consumer]

So it looks like a federal judgment dictates how a business runs their operation

So much for a free market...being a printer, I would hate for the government to tell/make me print unacceptable media.

 

[bogus]

It is really sickening to me also. I am not a deeply religious person, but it is very concerning that an athiest group would make such an effort and go to such great expense. The involvement of the ACLU is, however, no surprise as their origins came from defending communists many years ago. Maybe the communists were being overly scutinized and persecuted. I do not know. I was not paying much attention to such things back then.

I agree. I don't know all the details of what has transpired with this, but I get a "Bam! Take That!" from the story. I would like to know the overall intent.

 

[Sinner Man]

Well, I'm not saying it's right but it is true. Lots of people aren't that serious about religion and they can be treatedly harshly by peers who are.

Just because someone doesn't go to church doesn't mean they are bad. I hope that is all they are trying to say.

Looks more like they are just trying to cause trouble.

 

[BloodEclipse]

It is a national campaign. We talked about it in December of last year.
https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/politics_laws_and_2nd_amendment/13188-why_believe_in_a_god_just_be_good.html

 

[K_W]

So it looks like a federal judgment dictates how a business runs their operation

So much for a free market...being a printer, I would hate for the government to tell/make me print unacceptable media.

It says that if you let any other organization, group, religion, or whatever have ad space on you buses for a flat fee, you can't say "No" or charge more to another simply because it's not what you believe. That is called discrimination, hence the lawsuit.

They have just as much of a right to post those murals as any other company, organization, interest group, or religious organization. You may not like it, but it's true.

 

[bogus]

It is a national campaign. We talked about it in December of last year.
https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/politics_laws_and_2nd_amendment/13188-why_believe_in_a_god_just_be_good.html

Good reading. Thanks for info!

 

[Bill of Rights]

It says that if you let any other organization, group, religion, or whatever have ad space on you buses for a flat fee, you can't say "No" or charge more to another simply because it's not what you believe. That is called discrimination, hence the lawsuit.

They have just as much of a right to post those murals as any other company, organization, interest group, or religious organization. You may not like it, but it's true.

If the transit company is 100% public-owned, yes, I would agree with you. If it is at all (or completely) privately owned, however, that decision is made solely by the owner of the buses.

Consider:
A few years ago, some companies were paying private citizens to use their vehicles as mobile billboards. Those who chose to take part had to promise that their vehicles would be out in public a certain amount of time, such that the advertising would be seen, but they were paid by the company to allow their property to be so used. My understanding of this ruling would dictate that if you had any such advertising, you would be required to allow any company or group to advertise on your car if they wanted to do so. Example: Let us say that a person who happens to be a devout Catholic chooses to allow Nike to advertise sneakers on his car. Must that same person allow Trojan to advertise condoms as well?
If I chose to allow advertising from "Mom's Apple Pie Co.", would I be forced to allow the "American" Communist Party to advertise on my vehicle?

No, this is an individual business decision unless the property in question is 100% public property.



FWIW, I agree, you don't need God to be good... but He sure has an attractive benefit package for those of us who do.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[mettle]

We are about 10 years behind Britain, but we'll catch up one of these days with them. Then people will wish we hadn't caught up with them.

 

[Lucas156]

They have just as much of a right to post those murals as any other company, organization, interest group, or religious organization. You may not like it, but it's true.

Its not a right necessarily. The government forcing a private business to do this would be disturbing.

 

[K_W]

Its not a right necessarily.

How so? If everyone else is free to advertise why can't they. They are not advocating anything illegal.

The government forcing a private business to do this would be disturbing.

Yes, it would be disturbing, but the Bloomington Public Transportation Corporation is not a completely private buisiness.

 

[SC_Shooter]

Not surprisingly, I'm with Bill on this one. Without going into what the specifics of this law or that law may require or imply (IANAL, nor are most of us), it is blatantly wrong in my humble opinion for a private business to be forced into an advertising agreement with an advertiser it objects to.

In this state an employer can fire me at will for ANY reason or NO reason (provided that I am unable to prove it was for some sort of illegally discriminatory purposes). Why should advertising be effectively given more protection than one's income?

Living here in Bloomington, I've been hearing about this issue for a while now and it was about the transit company's policy against allowing advertising for OR against certain controversial issues. It was not a matter of "we Christian business owners don't want you Atheist types to advertise on our busses." Could that have been the case with a few people who work there? Of course it could have. The underlying issue was about their policy, not their personal beliefs. Bloomington is quite liberal and open to that sort of thing you know - drank the election Kool-Aid and all.

In doing a little digging, the Bloomington Public Transportation Corporation is not a government owned business. It has it's own Board of Directors and managerial staff like many other businesses. The business does get heavy subsidies and outright funding from the city, which muddies the waters, but it does not seem to be a government business entity outright.

Based on this digging, I suspect that the pressure was because of the large amount of tax dollar funding each year. Even though Bloomington Transit is not a government business, it is tied in so tightly that there is not really that much of a difference. Don't believe me? Just ask GM.

 

[K_W]

This is from the Bloomington Herald...

"Bloomington Mayor Mark Kruzan said he disagrees with the BT policy and hes asked city governments legal department not to represent BT in court.

"I felt strongly that the city shouldn't be defending on this issue", he said Thursday.

Bloomington Public Transportation Corp. operates as a separate municipal corporation, which contracts with the city of Bloomington legal department to provide legal services.

Kruzan said having city legal defend BT in court would amount to promoting government sanctioned censorship because the bus service gets city legals services at an hourly rate less than that of a private law firm, which is in essence a partial taxpayer subsidy."

 

[mettle]

It is also blatantly wrong for liberals to use litigation and legislation; which they say that 'Christians' use to enforce morals via legislation, to enforce their OWN beliefs about God.

The anti-God people are using legislation and the courts to enforce their own beliefs. Yet somehow, it's only the 'Christians' who are wrong for trying this tactic.

That folks, is how the liberal movement works. Cleverly disguising fables and motives by using cunningly devised plans and carefully laid words.

Just like the media does with our gun rights.

So go ahead, join their side, and support their mode of operations... it is only getting stronger and more aggressive on all fronts. Soon, we who own guns, love this country and believe that morals and traditional living ARE relevant to this day and age are soon to be 'domestic terrorists', labeled by the same rabble that worked to get this 'non-God bus sign' issue forced through.

 

[Crystalship1]

Cleverly disguising fables and motives by using cunningly devised plans and carefully laid words.

Yeah!!! That's the church's job!!!

Who do these people think they are?? If they want to be able to spread the word in what they believe (or don't believe) without fear of interference by those members of the state sponsored church, they should set sail on ships and sail to a foreign land and build a new establishment where they can be free of ridicule and suppression and have freedom to....... oh....... wait............

Maybe it's time to start the trials again!!

 

[bogus]

I have no bone to pick about their rights. I do however dislike the approach. Why take it to the Federal courts? Do they feel the need to prove they have the ability or capability to do such just for the sake of it? What's the point or purpose? To sway to majority to the atheist belief/non-belief? I don't get it...

 

[mettle]

Yeah!!! That's the church's job!!!

Who do these people think they are?? If they want to be able to spread the word in what they believe (or don't believe) without fear of interference by those members of the state sponsored church, they should set sail on ships and sail to a foreign land and build a new establishment where they can be free of ridicule and suppression and have freedom to....... oh....... wait............

Maybe it's time to start the trials again!!

Sorry to disappoint, the Catholic church is not the original or real church. But yes, there were witch hunts b/c superstition and ignorance from the non-God religion was controlling people.

Mock all you want to; but eventually, there is going to be a non-Christian, state sponsored that will enforce its own laws on you, again. So, you think it's bad now, wait 'til the other side gets control of the legislation.

You will wish you had us 'evil' ones back to mock and call ignorant. But, the other side won't let you have your guns, nor your internet, nor your opinion, nor your own schedule... it will rule you with an iron hand.

It's coming friend. Mock and be whimsical now while you have the chance and enjoy your freedoms, because one day you won't. And THAT judgment will be final.

 

[Crystalship1]

Sorry to disappoint, the Catholic church is not the original or real church. But yes, there were witch hunts b/c superstition and ignorance from the non-God religion was controlling people.

Mock all you want to; but eventually, there is going to be a non-Christian, state sponsored that will enforce its own laws on you, again. So, you think it's bad now, wait 'til the other side gets control of the legislation.

You will wish you had us 'evil' ones back to mock and call ignorant. But, the other side won't let you have your guns, nor your internet, nor your opinion, nor your own schedule... it will rule you with an iron hand.

It's coming friend. Mock and be whimsical now while you have the chance and enjoy your freedoms, because one day you won't. And THAT judgment will be final.

No disappointment. I didn't say anything about the Catholic church. One variety is the same as another as far as I'm concerned. As for mocking, well.. if saying that when a group of "believers" suppresses a group of "non-believers" or "different believers" is wrong... well then I guess I am mocking. Also... I didn't call anyone ignorant.

So many groups of "believers" regardless of what brand, want freedom to express... but only their brand of belief!!