Stumble This | You should also watch “Ace of Base - The Sign” |
A sign put up and paid for by the Freedom From Religion Foundation saying "Imagine No Religion" was taken down recently due to complaints made by people to the city.
So much for free speech and freedom of religion...
So much for free speech and freedom of religion...
Jessica Biel + Ice Cube + Christmas = Win!
And I'm offended by Viagra commercials, Mormons continually asking me if I've heard about Jesus, unilateral and preemptive war, gargantuan SUVs, Proposition 8, and a myriad of other things. But you don't see me protesting billboards for them.
This has nothing to do with freedom of speech or religion. The government did not outlaw the billboard or force them to take it down. The company that put it up decided to take it down, just like some billboard companies decided not to display other atheist billboards.
I personally don't have a problem with the billboard, nor do I have a problem with the religious billboards. As long as neither are hateful or attacking, they're just offering a point of view. I really don't see how the billboard was hurting anything. If the government put the billboard up then that would be a different issue.
In the end it was a business decision, not a freedom issue. The company thought it might hurt their business so they took it down. The "First Amendment R.I.P." is completely off-base since this does not involve the government in any way (from what I can tell at least).
On the bright side, they people who paid for the billboard got all of their money back and the ad was broadcast across the world due to the news coverage. I think they got a pretty good deal, don't you?
That said, the company could have shown a little backbone.
This is also an issue of "religious" persecution. If I'm turned away from a restaurant on the basis of my (non)religion or ethnicity, that's illegal. The billboard company should not be at liberty to refuse to do business on the open market with people or groups on the basis of their beliefs, or how others respond to their beliefs.
If theology has veto power over the market, and the market makes these decisions, the market is simply a tool of theocracy.
If churches where buying up all the billboards in order to control what is on them, that is a legitimate (and expensive) market intervention.
When people call in and file complaints and threaten boycotts of companies who do business with people they disagree with, they are demanding religious persecution, that is a political intervention in the market. Don't try and cleanse this by passing it through the market, this is systematic religious persecution, the government permits it and the business enacts it. Selling billboard space does not give one the right to discriminate against people on the basis of their religious views, that is a "freedom" the government does not, and should not, permit its citizens.
You are absolutely correct - the company has the right to put up (or refuse to put up) whatever it wants on its billboards (however, they still should honor contractual agreements that they freely enter into - but that's another issue).
The local government had no right nor duty to pass along complaints to a private company (do you really think they would EVER do this regarding a religious-themed sign?), thus encouraging the sign's removal.
So I must take exception to the claim that this has NOTHING to do with the first amendment...
And yeah, the R.I.P. is hyperbolic. So sue me...
Fred Boon - Athiest
They got the billboard on the news and all over youtube.
Atheism Win.
From what I've been able to gather, the complaints were made to the CITY (Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency) and then passed on to the company.
You are absolutely correct - the company has the right to put up (or refuse to put up) whatever it wants on its billboards (however, they still should honor contractual agreements that they freely enter into - but that's another issue).
The local government had no right nor duty to pass along complaints to a private company (do you really think they would EVER do this regarding a religious-themed sign?), thus encouraging the sign's removal.
So I must take exception to the claim that this has NOTHING to do with the first amendment...
And yeah, the R.I.P. is hyperbolic. So sue me...
I disagree. If all the city did was to pass along complaints that they mistakenly received, I don't see a problem with it. IF they told the company to take it down because of the complaints that would be different. Having the city just pass along complaints seems like the correct thing for the city to do. Based on your option, if the city receives complaints for anything, they should just ignore it? They obviously shouldn't step in and make a decision on this sign, nor any others unless they are vulgar in some way, in which case, depending on the circumstances they may have to get involved.
That's EXACTLY what they should do - ignore the complaints.
When you are a government official (elected or otherwise) you are not to intervene in issues such as this. I know this having held elected office in my community.
If the sign was in any way lewd or vulgar, it would more than likely be addressed under a public nuisance ordinance, in which case the city would be duty-bound to address it. Under any other circumstance it potentially amounts to violating the establishment clause.
Passing this on as a private individual is one thing but as a representative of the government, pulling crap like this leaves you (justifiably IMHO) wide open for a lawsuit and that's precisely what's happened.
"It's a violation of freedom of speech!"
"It's just capitalism!"
Only I wouldn't expect complaints to lead to a religious billboard being removed. It's noble to stand up to complaints against religion. It's immoral to stand up to complaints against atheism. (That's my perception of societal standards, not my personal belief.)
Censored! FFRF Billboard Removed by Outdoor Company
"Imagine No Religion" Billboard Comes Down in Cucamonga
http://ffrf.org/news/2008/censorship.php
FFRF Sues City of Rancho Cucamonga over Censorship of "Imagine No Religion" Billboard. Asks for Punitive Damages.
http://ffrf.org/news/2008/rancho_complaint.php
also... If you want to complain the billboard company:
General Outdoor Advertising
909-983-4414
http://www.general-outdoor.com/Contact.htm
Private company, their billboard.
How long would a "Homosexuality is wrong" billboard last in that same liberal-fascist environment?
The company that owns the signs have the right to not put up anything they want, just as any store can choose not to serve you for whatever reason. It may be political persecution from the religious, but the store is not to blame in that. It's their right to not show it.
One could argue that "the market" quashes the obscure or quiet, while the loudmouths are preferred and therefore something like public signs should be handled by a public entity, ie. the government.
I have to agree with ObsidianStorm, having the complaints passed on by government officials carries with it a certain amount of weight...
That's fine, as long as it doesn't involve enforcement. The city can even suggest that they take it down due to complaints, but they can't force the company to take it down legally.
Ideally the local gov't would tell anyone that called them about it that it doesn't violate any laws and that they should contact the billboard company. Maybe they were doing that, the video doesn't say. They could have been passing along the information as a courtesy, which is fine with me. It is understandable that some people wouldn't want that to happen at all, but it still isn't a first amendment issue because the gov't isn't enforcing anything in this case.
If the town made it illegal to put up atheist billboards then that would be a definite problem, but I can't really get worked up over them passing along information unless they were strongly suggesting it be taken down. Even that wouldn't be breeching the first amendment, it would just be poor character.
Edit: They are suing the local government over this, but it seems to be over the city "suggesting" that it be taken down. If that is all the city did then I don't know how far the lawsuit will go (unless the city also "suggested" that there would be consequences if they didn't take it down).
Muslims are getting a bad rap for their religion. Even some different Christian groups can't stand each other. Hell, everyone takes the piss out of the Scientologists!!! If I go start a new religion based on WeWah, the God of Nourishment, should I really have the right to insist that I'm taken seriously? Ok, maybe that last one goes a bit far but you get the point.
So, please, don't give me the bullshit of you can beleive in whatever religion you want as long as it's not "no religion", because what you really mean is that you want people to believe YOUR religion and if they don't they're gonna burn.
Sure, agnostics and atheists are gonna burn hotter, but still...
Really. It is true.Some magic zombie dude rose from the dead to save the white man from evil. Now lets convert slaves to Christianity too and subjugate them completely. A slave adopting their slaver's god. Brainwashing at it's best.
Angels are real. Demons are real too. Horned red dudes with forked tails. Really. I am telling you the truth. If you don't believe me, you must be living in the REAL world or something.
right on.
...err... no it's not. in fact, what she just said offends me. maybe i should ban her.
A new age of chaos.
Religious belief was already proven by SCIENCE to be genetic in humans. Some people just believe in different things, even though they dont call them religion.
Anyway, its still silly to remove such a sign. On the other hand it wouldnt be stupid to remove a sign that states "Imagine No Laws".