Amusing, in a headdesky way, or headdesky in an amusing way?

[tree_and_leaf]

Dawkins and Sherine back bus ads reading "There's probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life."

.... yeah. Atheist says: stop thinking and take my word for it!

(Actually, that's a little unfair, because the ads are intended as a response to a series of evangelical ones threatening non-Christians with hell-fire. All the same, the fear of hell is not exactly integral to the faith of most of the religious people I know†, and I cannot say that a sudden loss of my faith would improve my enjoyment of life; quite the reverse.)

On a side note, buried in the article is the information that Dawkins supports a Tory humanist group. I didn't know he was a Tory, but for some reason I'm not entirely surprised. (ETA: see comment from lizw below; this appears to be a misunderstanding.

† The only sense I can make of Hell is total alienation from God, and therefore all that is good, of becoming lost in myself and in hatred, which does indeed scare me quite a lot, but I suspect that's not the sort of thing Dawkins et al think I'm scared of.

Comments

[legionseagle.livejournal.com]

I've found this link here (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jun/20/transport.religion) which gives precise details of the campaign which sparked the counter-campaign, if that makes sense.

I have to say, I share the fury of the original writer about the first set of ads, but I can't see the logical connection between the fury and the response; surely she must have realised that many people who were offended were offended by the fact of advertising about closely held and personal matters of belief, as though they were comparative forms of soap powder, not the content of the advertisements?

FWIW I detest the notion of the Dawkins bus ads for more-or-less the same reasons as you state - offensive, so reductive of complex attitudes and beliefs as to be virtually meaningless and, essentially, stupid.

[tree_and_leaf]

Now I look at the article, I vaguely remember it, and I remember thinking that I would have been infuriated for by the ads, but, as you say, for a variety of reasons, none of which result from atheism.

surely she must have realised that many people who were offended were offended by the fact of advertising about closely held and personal matters of belief, as though they were comparative forms of soap powder, not the content of the advertisements?

Yes - there's something vaguely indecent about it, quite apart from the fact that it tends to result in a meaningless slogan (if you can dignify it with the name).