Independence Day!

[SkullKing]

Maybe she meant that for her the commemoration it is not that important, not necessarily the original act?

[BlaqueKatt]

First, just because you found supporting articles that prove the point you were trying to make, the original one still doesn't say what you said it did.

so you're arguing that because I mistakenly linked the wrong article* and linked the correct article in a subsequent post after realizing the error, only the first post is valid? Yup I made a mistake, and rather than edit my original post to hide the mistake, I made a second post, how dare I do that...*headdesk*

*I had read several and reopened the wrong tab. second time I've admitted to linking the wrong article and still you attack the firs, that I HAVE ALREADY ADMITTED was an "oops wrong link"

the ones would would actually be reading and looking at those banners, shouldn't think that those who aren't religious are attacking them, even if they feel that way only because somebody with too much money and an agenda didn't bother to run his slogan by a few uninvolved non-atheists to see how easily it could be mis-interpreted.

$23,000 raised by private donations
[QUOTE=Ghel;89219 They don't want to conceive of living in a country that doesn't follow their religion. They don't want to understand that this country was founded on secular, rather than religious, principles.[/QUOTE]

The reality, in the United States and most of the rest of the world, is that religion has a tremendously privileged status. Religion is deeply embedded into our culture and our laws. So much so that it's often invisible until it's pointed out. At which point -- as is so often the case with privilege -- those whose privilege is being critiqued tend to squawk loudly, and resist vehemently, and act as if a terrible injustice is being committed. It is a classic example of privileged people defending their privilege by taking on the mantle of victimhood. It is a classic example of privileged people acting as if resistance to their privilege somehow constitutes misunderstanding, bigotry, and oppression/attack.

[Andara Bledin]

so you're arguing that because I mistakenly linked the wrong article* and linked the correct article in a subsequent post after realizing the error, only the first post is valid?

If you had, at any point, such as after my initial comment, said that that first article wasn't the one you had intended to link, we wouldn't be having this discussion. My entire point was that the article didn't support the conclusion, no more, no less.

second time I've admitted to linking the wrong article and still you attack the firs, that I HAVE ALREADY ADMITTED was an "oops wrong link"

No, actually, at no point did you actually say that you had intended to link a different article from the beginning. If you had, I wouldn't have had any reason to pursue the matter.

^-.-^

[Evandril]

I don't think the message is being misinterpreted. I think it's the actual message that strongly religious folks are objecting to. They don't want to conceive of living in a country that doesn't follow their religion. They don't want to understand that this country was founded on secular, rather than religious, principles.

Most importantly, it is unpopular speech that is most in need of protection. It is completely contrary to the OP to suggest that free speech should be curtailed because of what the listener/viewer might think of it.

Actually, the first thing I'd think if I saw a banner with 'God-less America' is it was some fanatic religious group that feels we're straying from the path for whatever reason...So I do not think that banner would have been effective. In my opinion, there is nothing in that sign that shows you want the government to be secular, not the whole of America.

The main point of 'freedom of speech' is the freedom from the government's interferance...and nowhere in this thread have I seen the government taking part. As far as changing what you say based on what others will think of it...Isn't that pretty much the *point* of this type of message? If you really don't care what anyone will think of what you say, why bother spending $23k to say it? If you *do* care, don't you want to phrase things in such a way to be most effective?