This morning, wasting time on Facebook, I found out that a friend of mine had just signed up in support of the Atheist Bus Campaign. Two days earlier, I hadn't even known such a campaign existed. But as is sometimes happens, more frequently that it should by pure chance, I read and heard about this campaign three times over the last forty-eight hours. Maybe it's some sort of Gladwellian tipping point.
In case you haven't heard yet, here's the scoop: Ariane Sherine, a blogger at the Guardian, saw a bus ad about son, man, faith and earth, recognized it as a religious message, chose to visit the advertised website, and developed wild bouts of indignation about religion invading public space and terrorizing innocent infidels.
I consider myself an innocent infidel, but I don't feel terrorized. I don't even understand the problem. As I see it, these ads are created to pay for public transport. That's a noble cause that everybody should be free to contribute to. Given that they are ads, their messages shouldn't be taken too seriously and, for those who don't like a particular display, can easily be ignored. Ask me what's currently splashed to the outside of buses – I wouldn't know.
Anyway, Ariane Sherine got all worked up but didn't just go home and fume at the monstrosity of what she had seen. She came up with a way of retaliating in kind – by plastering an atheist message on London buses. "There's probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life." This would cost just a bit under 25000 pounds per bus for a two-week run, and this is where the Atheist Bus Campaign comes into play. Over the last few days, lots of people have donated small amounts, and some have choked up big money. The tally stands at 100 grand at the moment, enough for four buses.
Again, I don't get it. What's the point? Who benefits? The benevolent altruist in me wonders if there aren't any more-worthwhile causes that deserve 100000 pounds. On the other hand, Transport for London recently acknowledged losing 40 million pounds in an Icelandic pyramid scheme (known as savings bank before the whole country melted down). I guess they could do well with a little extra. And I'm happy if buses run smoothly and frequently, be it with God or without.
There's some discrepancy in the reported numbers. How much does it cost to turn a bus into a billboard? According to this recent post, not a whole lot. How many buses are we getting with the kind of money that's being raised?
2 comments:
people get so worked up
but what does a declaration do about the existence or non-existence of God aside from speak for the mere satisfaction of being heard?
Do Atheists try to help others? Do they start schools and hospitals and try to feed the hungry all in the name of the absence of God? Not often. Likely they do it because they feel it should be done but their denial of the existence of a higher power is mostly impotent and without any consequence in anyone's life except to suggest that our existence is ex nihilo.
Many things have been done wrong in the name of religion but how is the mere iteration of belief offensive? Is the leader simply angry that she didn't get to the bus first?
My original post was supposed go a different way but then I got distracted by my own thoughts while writing.
I'm in the process of assembling a potentially contentious post about religion. Caution demands that I get all the arguments right. That's why it might be a while till you get to read it.
I agree that the iteration of belief (or disbelief) can't possibly be offensive. A post on that topic is also in the works in my head...
Post a Comment