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** » Tue Jun 24, 2014 4:05 am

Of course it is disrespectful. Some Christians have adopted the fish symbol to represent their faith. This is an ancient symbol. And because some Christians, particularly those who strongly oppose biological sciences, use that symbol, some of those who support the teachings of science have deliberately fashioned the Darwin fish to appear similar to the Jesus fish, mocking their faith.

Personally, I cannot see how bumper-sticker religion can be anything but disrespectful. It avoids dealing with our differences as thinking humans and reduces debate to mere sloganeering. Would we be as accepting of the mockery of the Star of David, the Crescent and Star, the Buddhist Wheel of Life or any of the others?

ThePainefulTruth · Post by **ThePainefulTruth** » Tue Jun 24, 2014 5:10 am

McCulloch wrote: Of course it is disrespectful. Some Christians have adopted the fish symbol to represent their faith. This is an ancient symbol. And because some Christians, particularly those who strongly oppose biological sciences, use that symbol, some of those who support the teachings of science have deliberately fashioned the Darwin fish to appear similar to the Jesus fish, mocking their faith.

Personally, I cannot see how bumper-sticker religion can be anything but disrespectful. It avoids dealing with our differences as thinking humans and reduces debate to mere sloganeering. Would we be as accepting of the mockery of the Star of David, the Crescent and Star, the Buddhist Wheel of Life or any of the others?

Most of the major religions claim a degree of exclusivity and the only path of right thinking since the claimed source is divine revelation--with no homage towards at least something of an agnostic attitude. Therefore all of their symbols are an affront to those not in the group. The cross says all non-believers are going to hell in the next life. The crescent says non-believers are going to hell in this life under Sharia Law. The Jews claim to be God's chosen people. They all discourage or prohibit marriage outside of the "faith", perhaps the biggest affront possible.

The point being, if you're going to project disrespect with your symbol and the "faith" behind it, you can't reasonably resent your symbol being disrespected. The only path to righteously prevent disrespect, is to prove your faith...and if you did that, I'd be first in line to be baptized or whatever.

The only religious symbol that isn't tied to a religious institution of some sort is the Yin/Yang symbol of Tao, which also emphasizes the individual not a group, church, standard set of tenets or any claim to exclusivity. The Yin/Yang symbol is also the closest symbolic representation of the concept of Truth I've been able to find, something the organized religions give little but lip service to.

BTW, I'm not an advocate of Tao, but it has my deepest respect for anything coming close to being a religion.

KenRU · Post by **KenRU** » Tue Jun 24, 2014 1:55 pm

[Replying to post 11 by McCulloch]

Thanks to everyone for sharing their opinions thus far. I appreciate the input!

Personally, I cannot see how bumper-sticker religion can be anything but disrespectful. It avoids dealing with our differences as thinking humans and reduces debate to mere sloganeering.
You don't think it encourages discussion? Debate? After all, we're here talking about it now.

Would we be as accepting of the mockery of the Star of David, the Crescent and Star, the Buddhist Wheel of Life or any of the others?
I know I would have no issue with the mockery.

Goat · Post by **Goat** » Tue Jun 24, 2014 4:16 pm

McCulloch wrote: Of course it is disrespectful. Some Christians have adopted the fish symbol to represent their faith. This is an ancient symbol. And because some Christians, particularly those who strongly oppose biological sciences, use that symbol, some of those who support the teachings of science have deliberately fashioned the Darwin fish to appear similar to the Jesus fish, mocking their faith.

Personally, I cannot see how bumper-sticker religion can be anything but disrespectful. It avoids dealing with our differences as thinking humans and reduces debate to mere sloganeering. Would we be as accepting of the mockery of the Star of David, the Crescent and Star, the Buddhist Wheel of Life or any of the others?

It can be that way. There are those people whose motivation is to shove their religious beliefs in others faces.

Then, there are those who just wish to display something that has deep meaning to them.

I have come across both types of people.

JoeyKnothead · Post by **JoeyKnothead** » Fri Jun 27, 2014 9:18 pm

From the OP:

Is the Darwin's Fish sticker disrespectful?

Don't care.

When your god calls me a "fool", and you're proud of him for having done it, I finger-hurl such extraneous nasal material I couldn't eat all of in both of y'all's direction.

mwtech · Post by **mwtech** » Sat Jun 28, 2014 1:01 am

I don't see either the Jesus fish or the Darwin fish as offensive. It is just a symbol to let people know what you believe and how you identify yourself. In my opinion, anyone who can get offended at the mere sight of a couple lines and curves that indicates some stranger disagrees with him, doesn't really have enough confidence in his own beliefs. I often find that when someone gets defensive and angry over something so small, they feel guilty, or unsure about something they have done or believe. Of course, some people are just very passionate.

I do understand, however, that as a Christian who believes in Hell, if you know someone is not a Christian you can feel personally responsible for trying to save a non-believer. I can respect that. On some level I'm sure it's flattering that you care enough to bother. But when I was a christian and saw anything about evolution, I didn't get angry. I just shook my head and sighed. That was, up until I started doubting my faith. Then I got angry and defensive against any mention of evolution and tried to convince whoever I was talking to (but mostly myself) that I was right.

McCulloch · Post by **McCulloch** » Sat Jun 28, 2014 8:38 am

mwtech wrote:I don't see either the Jesus fish or the Darwin fish as offensive. It is just a symbol to let people know what you believe and how you identify yourself.

The Darwin fish was deliberately designed to resemble the Jesus fish. It does not just say, "I believe evolution." It says, "I believe evolution and I thumb my nose at those people with their fish symbol. "

mwtech · Post by **mwtech** » Sat Jun 28, 2014 9:13 am

McCulloch wrote:
The Darwin fish was deliberately designed to resemble the Jesus fish. It does not just say, "I believe evolution." It says, "I believe evolution and I thumb my nose at those people with their fish symbol. "

Just because it was designed to resemble the Jesus fish doesn't mean it was sticking its tongue out at Christians. Some people may see it that way. I see the similarity as a way to show that you believe in evolution, and disbelieve in creationism. It can imply that creationism is wrong without it being childish and condescending.

wiploc · Post by **wiploc** » Sat Jun 28, 2014 11:27 am

McCulloch wrote:
mwtech wrote:I don't see either the Jesus fish or the Darwin fish as offensive. It is just a symbol to let people know what you believe and how you identify yourself.
The Darwin fish was deliberately designed to resemble the Jesus fish. It does not just say, "I believe evolution." It says, "I believe evolution and I thumb my nose at those people with their fish symbol. "

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.

ThePainefulTruth · Post by **ThePainefulTruth** » Sat Jun 28, 2014 11:59 am

wiploc wrote:
McCulloch wrote:
mwtech wrote:I don't see either the Jesus fish or the Darwin fish as offensive. It is just a symbol to let people know what you believe and how you identify yourself.
The Darwin fish was deliberately designed to resemble the Jesus fish. It does not just say, "I believe evolution." It says, "I believe evolution and I thumb my nose at those people with their fish symbol. "
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.

And anyway, there's no such thing as a right not to be offended. And what does it mean when you take offense anyway? Nothing that you don't give them the power to do. And sometimes, offense should be taken to heart. Then knock them on their ass if they weren't sufficiently tactful.