Thank you, God
 

Last week I was driving, of all places , to a bowling alley in my realtively tiny college town, and I noticed a billboard in the distance: Now, who has the right to do this?? Has God made some kind of copyright agreement with a certain religious that they get to use his name for their cause...does God get royalties? If God isn't making money off the use of his name then, who is? How are we so pompous to use God on a billboard on push an agenda we don't even know God follows? What if God doesn't agree, is it fraud? I have seen other one's apparently signed by the Virgin Mary herself! When they aren't running heaven, are God and the Mary corporate slaves trying to make a quick buck? You'd think Jesus would notice sometime if his mom and dad were whoring themselves off to some billboard company...


Or is something just completely and morally wrong about using the idea of God to push your agenda on a trashy billboard? What are the implications of this?

I don't know about you, but I smell a rat...

I can imagine that this thread spark some controversy.

From a christian point of view, based on the bible, it would be easy to support a statement like the one you saw. However, the same bible preaches against overusing the name of God, ie treating it with some degree of reverance.

Hey, even god needs some PR from time to time.

Televangelists/child molesting priests/people who poorly use church funding. Why the hell do christian people stand for that kind of stuff? Thousands of dollars on a billboard? Theres nothing better you can spend that on? If God were real (physical sense, i dont even want to get into THAT argument) i seriously doubt he would stand for the kind of shit the people that believe in him do. I think anyone Christian that cared about their faith would be up in arms about such an abuse of their beliefs.

It's a public domain idea...nobody has the rights to control use of the name, idenity or person of God.

Which frankly, is how it should be. Tacky as one might find that advertisement, it's part of the conversation. I think it is quite proper to be put off by the galling presumption shown by "speaking for" God as is done here...but i doubt anger is a useful response.

Since they weren't clear about it, perhaps the god they are referring to is Fetusia, protector of the unborn or something.

Didn't you hear? God was bought out by Time-Warner a couple of weeks ago. Moses was downsized, but he got a huge severence package, and they still suspect Judas of corporate sabotage.

http://www.icubed.com/~colagrrl/santa50b.jpg

Yeah, I don't think it's right for corporations to appropriate fictional characters that are part of the public domain either.

That's a moot point, we all know Santa sold out aeons ago. :thumbsup:

Tacky? Definitely. I guess if someone would rather waste money on a billboard like that than say, giving that money to a homeless shelter or helping out fellow churchmembers in need, then bully for them. I somehow doubt a billboard is going to give someone an epiphany moment about abortion, but thats just me.

I agree this isn't going to really change any opinions (and it would have read better if you pressed enter after "thank you," to look something like this...
because I am guessing it's one of those from, god type billboards....correct me if I'm wrong..

yeah the money would have been better spent elsewhere, it's not changing anybodies mind or anything....

Church President: "Hmmm, we seem to have some extra money in the budget this year."

Priest: "Well, why don't we use it to help fund a local hospital?"

President: "No, let's use it to help fund a local women's shelter."

Priest: "Brilliant! Let's help women in need get their lives back together."

President: "Brilliant!"

God's voice cuts in: "NO! I want you to spend that money on a billboard in my name to try and guilt trip women out of having an abortion."

President and Priest: "Brilliant!"

--------------------------------------------------------------------

I have no idea why people behave this way, you would think that someone who believed in an all-powerful god, who created this entire universe, would stop to think for a second that if he didn't actually want people having abortions, that he would stop them his self. And don't go into "free will", because making it illegal for women to have an abortion is also taking away their "free will".

WHAT!?

People are actually using the notion of God to push their own personal political ideologies? I am shocked and appalled! I never thought I would see the day that religion was abused in such a manner.

I think it's funny how people use god as an excuse...

"I'm not furthering my personal interests, GOD is the one that is against abortion"

"I only planted that carbomb in the name of god"

. . . I wonder how many parents tell their kids they have to be good or else GOD will punish them.

Why is this in philosophy?

Seems this belongs in "Politics".

It'll be moved there unless someone can make a good argument for it to stay here.

The idea of "God" is based in philosophy. This deals with the cheapening of a religious figure. Sounds philosophical to me.

Neeways, propoganda playing on peoples religon is disgraceful. Maybe they'll have some time to think about it when they are in hell for all of eternity! :thumbsup:

SOOOOOO, everytime "God" is mentioned in "Politics" I should ship the discussion over here??

I didn't think so :D

No, it just means that it can fit in either category, sometimes more one than the other, but it is still not dichotomous.

the real question is why is god used in such a way?

It seems to me like some people are just down right offeneded when someone mentions or believes in God. (I respect other beliefs, please don't disrespect mine)

This makes my day. Awexome.

It would seem people are offended when someone attempts to speak for this god entity, not when the word is mentioned. The issue ,it seems to me, is the belief by some that they have a more complete understanding of the thoughts of God and others are wrong in the interpretations they hold. I personally, am offended by the persons, not the God. I actually think God is rather cool, She treats me very well, and has given me a great place to play.

Hit it on the head.

few of you understand the motivations that drive those sorts of billboards.

the (in all likelihood) christian group that put up that billboard would stare at you blankly if you accused them of co-opting God's name for their own cause. they don't think of the cause as their own... but a fundamental mandate FROM God, not a personal observation ABOUT God.

to Christian's (like myself) the issue of abortion clearly violates principles that are directly derived from the Bible... a document that we believe to be God's testament of himself to man. so, it's useless and besides the point to whine about Christian's using God's name for their own benefit in this issue (i would agree with similar criticism in others) because the issue does not belong to them.

this is something that is misunderstood across a broad range of Christian/secular encounters. Christians are accused of enforcing their personal mandates on others... as if the Christian held that such values are their own to define. no. the Christian makes (hopefully) few value judgements based on their own preferences and instead holds that sacred scripture is the final authority of man, with God as its sovereign arbiter. there are times when i think organizations that put themselves under the Christian label extend the spiritual mandate to include their own dogmas, but i do not think abortion is one of them.

Mary is a human being,she has no control over Heaven.

It's easy to get up in arms about a political message that runs counter to one's own beliefs, but I think irateplatypus is very correct about where the originators of the billboard were probably coming from.

Though many here have criticized the billboard as useless, it is intended to provoke thought. Note the language used: God refers to aborted children as "his" babies. This drives home two points. First, of course, it reminds people that there is a religious argument to be made against abortion. But more importantly and specifically, it reminds them that what is often frequently referred to as part of "a woman's body" is actually a soul that belongs to God, not to the child's parents. Thus the use of "my" strikes at the heart of the pro-abortion argument rooted in "choice" by placing unborn children beyond the jurisdiction of human beings.

Please note before responding to me that I don't particularly share the group's beliefs as stated in its message. The point is that the creators of the billboard are approaching the subject from within a specific moral-religious framework. They are not "using God to push their own agenda"; more likely they are acting out of faith to spread a message they genuinely believe is true and important, and that in their view comes from God himself. I don't see anything terribly wrong with that.

So we need to philosophise this thread Lebell? How's this,

The religious group that put's up that billboard is creating new religous text and thus solidifying their subjective beliefs based their interpertation of the bible.

I think it's strange that the Church thought that it would be more useful to do something like this. Would it not make more sense for them to use the money to produce pamphlets that discuss why it is bad to abort? To use the money to educate people on why they believe abortion is wrong, rather than just say that god says it is? With this poster, they're not going to change the minds of anyone who doesn't already agree, and that seems like a waste of money to me.

But, to discuss the other questions involved...

I don't know if using "god" in this advertisement is wrong. The church honestly believes that it is preaching the word of god, and therefore it seems that the use of the word "god" on the billboard is justified.

I don't agree, but I won't fight against it... I'd rather just use better methods of education to push a secular pro-choice agenda.

Oh, and I agree with Lebell. I don't think this is philosophy either.

I've mentioned it before, but I think it's worth bringing up here, that the Bible would hold more credibility in my mind had it not been translated and transcribed again and again, each time losing meaning and sometimes picking up the personal opinion and artistic touch of the translator or writer. Alteration to a "sacred" document were not hard to make when the only ones with access to the texts were the elite few, even if the masses had been literate and able to reproduce the texts.

If I were to assume, for a moment, that the Bible is the word of God, and instructions for His followers, then I would also have to be angry and worried on the behalf of those followers because of the changes made to scriptures over time. I know from my Catholic upbringing that the concept of Papal Infallibility deals with this quietly and efficiently, but I'm not sure how other religions would deal with potential inaccuracies in the latest printing of the word of God. Someone else will have to fill us in on that one.

Because he's the "Ultimate Authority" and never says a word.

All I have to do is find some obscure reference in the Bible, make some ridiculous claim and invoke the name of God.

If you had the opportunity to invoke the powerful name of such an authority aware that that authority was never, ever going to publicly admonish your use of his name, wouldn't you? Especially if you had an agenda that needed to be pushed. What better celebrity endorser than God? Bigger than Jesus and oh, so quiet.

Prior to having a child, the only use I saw for abortion was keeping undesirables from having children. Yes its a disgusting personally philosophy, but unless you are raped there is no excuse these days for an unwanted pregnancy.

Abortion is about selfishness to its core, its a 'me first' philosophy. I don't want a child, I don't want to deal with it, I will kill it before it becomes an issue, its MY body. Yes there are health issues which may endanger the mother, but that has nothing to do with the mind set of the pro-abortionists. If it was then the law would reflect that.

It is also an attempt to define the undefinable. If murder is wrong, when does life start? Using the 'when you can survive outside the womb' is a poor argument, as a child is helpless and will die for many years after birth if left unattended.

So as such I thought of abortion as a self imposed eugenics on those who shouldn't have children in the first place. It was an evil act, but served the greater good.

Now, as a father, I can't even think of it in those terms, and it requires no belief in god to find abortion morally repugnant.

Ustwo, I don't think that this thread is discussing abortion, really. Your post doesn't discuss much to do with the topic,.

I think there are other abortion threads that intended on discussing abortion, while this one seems to be about the use of 'god' in advertising. Right?

Don't forget that the concept of Papal Infallibility, or even the justification for the existence of a pope comes from an interpretation of the Bible.


I can't say I like the idea of such an add. My belief is that God belongs to no one. At the moment most religious groups won't look down upon the add because they agree with it but what will happen when they start advertising ideas more specific to their faith?

could then someone put up...

Thank you, Allah.

or Thank you Mohammed?

I don't think that those communities would stand for it.

Nope. not at all. You'd have a mob of hundreds in 10 minutes waving torches around wanting to tear those signs down and burn them.

We have a billboard here where i live on the highway that says "Jesus believes in you" and I get pissed everytime i have to drive by it. don't get me wrong, I do respect other ppl's beliefs and religions, but it's more of an invasion of privacy... like they're forciably pushing their religion on me. If ppl want to believe in something, then by all means go ahead (as long as it doesn't interfere w/ other's lives), but don't include everyone else in it or push it on ppl or think you can "save them" by converting them.

Honestly, do they think someone will drive by, see the sign, and say "Whoa! he believes in me, that changes everything!" and become a church going citizen from then on?

Exactly what my point is, you are complicit with your silence especially after you state how it pisses you off.

don't get me wrong, I wouldn't be among the people with torches, nor would I be among either side of the protesters. There's a place and time for religious views, but displaying it to the public in that fashion isn't one of them. Religion should be something sacred to people, and broadcasting it and forcing it upon people seems like a pervision to me. If you believe in something, your own solitary faith in it should be enough without the need or want to convert everyone you see. If someone doesn't share the same view point as you, then move on and let them live their own lives and follow their own path.

Forcing ones views on other people has never worked in the course of history, and almost always ends up in bloodshed.

Rumor has it, He "has a plan," as well as the omnipotency to carry it out anyway He sees fit. So why do these people need to start a PR campaign for him?

Just like I get pissed off everytime I drive by a "Nike, Just Do it" billbaord. don't get me wrong, I do respect other ppl's beliefs and religions, but it's more of an invasion of privacy... like they're forcibly pushing their "religion" on me... Or those other cultists...worshipers of the iPod, I've seen their billboards. Hate the fact that they're ramming it donw my throat.....

Honestly, do they think someone will drive by, see the sign, and say "Whoa! I should Just Do It, that changes everything!" and become a mindless consumer citizen from then on?

I cannot put it any more succinctly than jorgelito's post above mine.

People what to share what brings them happiness, whatever it is from driving a Saturn to listening to an iPod. Political ideas and religious ideas also fit into that same thing.