Darwin's Fish Decal

KenRU · Post by **KenRU** » Fri Jun 20, 2014 3:35 pm

I'm interested in both theist and atheist opinions.

Just purchased the Darwin's Fish decal from Amazon and was wondering what the popular consensus was. Do you find it offensive? Disrespectful?

I know its a light-weight topic and all, but nonetheless, they all don't have to center around quantum theory, right?

All the best,

-Ken

(my apologies if this has been discussed already in another post)

McCulloch · Post by **McCulloch** » Mon Jun 30, 2014 7:22 am

wiploc wrote:I have as much right to advertise my position as they have to advertise theirs. That doesn't mean I'm trying to offend by stating my position.

We have no problem understanding the intent of this image:

By choosing an image that is similar to a well known logo and modifying it in such a way as to make a position that is antithetical to the original intent, that is being deliberately disrespectful.

Someone using the Darwin fish is not just stating a position, but doing it in a way that mocks an alternate position.

ThePainefulTruth · Post by **ThePainefulTruth** » Mon Jun 30, 2014 11:03 am

McCulloch wrote:Someone using the Darwin fish is not just stating a position, but doing it in a way that mocks an alternate position.

Which arrogantly mocks those who don't believe in the fish. "You don't believe, you're going to hell!...and I'm not" Being offensive is ONLY a violation of political correctness. Sticks and stones, blah blah blah. The Darwin fish merely mocks the mockers.

mwtech · Post by **mwtech** » Mon Jun 30, 2014 11:15 am

Even if the designer of the fish intended to mock, does that mean that the person sporting the decal has the same intention? If I have two choices, the fisher of men or the fish of evolution, and I pick evolution because that is what I support, is it to be assumed that I intend to mock those who don't? Even if someone is offended by it, offense is taken, not given. And maybe sometimes offending someone is the only way to let them know that their ideas are not only silly and scientifically unjustifiable, but that it is harmful to the furthering of knowledge and science to continue denying that.

McCulloch · Post by **McCulloch** » Mon Jun 30, 2014 11:26 am

ThePainefulTruth wrote:The Darwin fish merely mocks the mockers.

Of course it does. There is a perception, probably completely warranted, that Christians, particularly the brand of Christians who sport the Jesus fish, are disrespectful of the science of evolutionary biology. So, it seems justified to some, that being disrespectful in return is justified. So, rather than answer the question about whether it is disrespectful (it is), you go into a justification of your disrespect: "He started it. Whaa!"

wiploc · Post by **wiploc** » Mon Jun 30, 2014 11:30 am

McCulloch wrote: Someone using the Darwin fish is not just stating a position, but doing it in a way that mocks an alternate position.

You don't get to determine other people's intentions.

There's a difference in taking offense and having been given offense.

ThePainefulTruth · Post by **ThePainefulTruth** » Mon Jun 30, 2014 11:52 am

McCulloch wrote:
ThePainefulTruth wrote:The Darwin fish merely mocks the mockers.
Of course it does. There is a perception, probably completely warranted, that Christians, particularly the brand of Christians who sport the Jesus fish, are disrespectful of the science of evolutionary biology. So, it seems justified to some, that being disrespectful in return is justified. So, rather than answer the question about whether it is disrespectful (it is), you go into a justification of your disrespect: "He started it. Whaa!"

OK, I'm standing by my justified disrespect/opinion. Now What?

Goat · Post by **Goat** » Mon Jun 30, 2014 7:41 pm

McCulloch wrote:
ThePainefulTruth wrote:The Darwin fish merely mocks the mockers.
Of course it does. There is a perception, probably completely warranted, that Christians, particularly the brand of Christians who sport the Jesus fish, are disrespectful of the science of evolutionary biology. So, it seems justified to some, that being disrespectful in return is justified. So, rather than answer the question about whether it is disrespectful (it is), you go into a justification of your disrespect: "He started it. Whaa!"

I disagree. I know someone who has the Jesus fish on his car, and completely accepts evolution. His wife is even more religious than he is, and is a biologist, (whose job is to examine the life up and down the Hudson river to see how climate change affects the ecology)

Yes, there are those that would view it as an insult. But, I know people who would embrace both symbols.. at the same time.

JoeyKnothead · Post by **JoeyKnothead** » Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:20 pm

Symbols, like beauty, are in the eye of the beholder...

WARNING...

Language...

Notions...

Really, you may find the following data upsetting.

But I swear I think it important to consider, regarding the OP...

[youtube][/youtube]

dianaiad · Post by **dianaiad** » Sun Jul 06, 2014 7:32 pm

Goat wrote:
McCulloch wrote:
ThePainefulTruth wrote:The Darwin fish merely mocks the mockers.
Of course it does. There is a perception, probably completely warranted, that Christians, particularly the brand of Christians who sport the Jesus fish, are disrespectful of the science of evolutionary biology. So, it seems justified to some, that being disrespectful in return is justified. So, rather than answer the question about whether it is disrespectful (it is), you go into a justification of your disrespect: "He started it. Whaa!"

I disagree. I know someone who has the Jesus fish on his car, and completely accepts evolution. His wife is even more religious than he is, and is a biologist, (whose job is to examine the life up and down the Hudson river to see how climate change affects the ecology)

Yes, there are those that would view it as an insult. But, I know people who would embrace both symbols.. at the same time.

I'm one of them. I have a Darwin fish on my car. OK, the car came with the Darwin fish, and the salesman offered to remove it for me. I said no, because I liked it....and when I was rear-ended a year or so ago, I made 'em put it back on my brand new bumper.

............because I believe that evolution is how God did it. For me the symbol is a combination of both my belief in God AND my belief in the methods He used to create us.

..............................and it makes my fundamentalist neighbor cringe. Or, it did until we sat down and talked about it. She's now thinking of getting one herself, to put on her bumper facing her 'Jesus fish."

Did the folks who designed it mean it to be mocking and disrespectful? Sure. Do I need to let them get away with it by agreeing with them that the idea of evolution mocks the idea of Christianity and of Jesus' teachings? Nope.

When my great grandparents were struggling in Missouri and environs, getting chased out of their home cities, states and nation, the folks around them referred to them with a demeaning label meant to mock and denigrate them.

Until they took that name and made it their own, and now calling someone a "Mormon" is not an insult.

So, I have the name 'Darwin" (standing for evolution) inside the symbol for Christianity, the fish. Both things symbolize beliefs with which I agree. If those who invented this symbol want to consider that it is mocking, they are quite free to continue to think so.

Doesn't bother me any. It's still on my bumper, and causes quite a few conversations.

agnosticatheist · Post by **agnosticatheist** » Sun Jul 06, 2014 8:56 pm

[Replying to post 29 by dianaiad]

Have you checked your inbox recently? I replied to the message you sent me a while back.