ATHEIST VS BAPTIST

[Blindgreed1]

The reason given by the Motor Vehicle Commission for denying Morgan's "8^THEIST" plate request was that it's "offensive" . . . That's why I think she has a valid complaint.

You can get a plate that reads "IAMGOD" and "BIOTCH" in New Jersey and that's not considered offensive, but "8^THEIST" is considered offensive?

If the Motor Vehicle Commission agreed that atheism isn't offensive late last year in Silverman's case, why is it again offensive this year in Morgan's?

Because, godless bitch or not, she has the right to express herself any way she wants as long as she pays the extra money for that vanity plate. It's discrimination, clearly.

A vanity plate is NOT a right. I don't deny and I applaud her "right to express herself any way she wants" . . . however, the State is not obligated to assist her. She can put a fucking sticker on her car proclaiming her infidel status.

"Youze pays yo' monies and youze takes yo' chances."

She knew at the outset, that "someone" had the power to deem the wording on a vanity plate "offensive." And that someone deemed her submission "offensive". What objective criteria was applied to reach this conclusion (or if such criteria exists), has not been offered by either side.

I have seen nothing to support her claim that it was a religious/non-religious rejection . . . that is her inference.

I have seen nothing to prohibit individual subjective criteria as a basis for denial.

Until such time that the specific criteria or motive for rejection is made public, it remains mere speculation.

However, it will be tough to argue that it is a bigoted and targeted denial, as both "ATHEIST" and "ATHE1^ST" has been granted by New Jersey.

Perhaps the "8" was interpreted by the evil discriminating staff worker as a phoneme for "HATE" . . . rendering the message "I hate those who believe in deities."

Maybe it was an atheist staff member who interpreted the "8" as "Infinity" and found the thought of "Infinite Deities" offensive.

I used "Baptist" as it was her proof of discrimination. I offered other religion specific choices that I believed would better demonstrate a religious preference or bias.

And then there's the whole cannibal thing . . . "Eaten".

"GODLESS" is still available in New Jersey (I checked) as a vanity plate . . . one she might consider to "express" her belief.

As to "IAMGOD" and "BIOTCH" . . .

Who isn't a "God" and why would you consider "Bio Tech" as offensive?

As an aside . . . I wonder if she paid with cash?

Bullshit. Argue it until your blu in the face Tiki, doesn't make it any less discriminatory. If one baptist can pay the price and get a religious statement on a vanity plate an athiest should not be denied the same opportunity for the same price.

[HairOfTheDog]

She knew at the outset, that "someone" had the power to deem the wording on a vanity plate "offensive." And that someone deemed her submission "offensive". What objective criteria was applied to reach this conclusion (or if such criteria exists), has not been offered by either side.

I have seen nothing to support her claim that it was a religious/non-religious rejection . . . that is her inference.

I have seen nothing to prohibit individual subjective criteria as a basis for denial.

Until such time that the specific criteria or motive for rejection is made public, it remains mere speculation.

Yeah, the subjectivity of what's "objectionable or offensive language" is the crux of the problem here, IMO.

You've seen nothing from the MVC to support or refute Morgan's religious discrimination inference/speculation because -- according to Morgan -- she's seen nothing, despite several in-person and on-line inquiries for an explanation as to what was objectionable or offensive about her request.

Thus, the logical (IMO) inference and speculation that the same atheist discrimination that Silverman experienced last year is being directed at Morgan this year by another Motor Vehicle clerk or review panel. And, thus, the lawsuit.

"GODLESS" is still available in New Jersey (I checked) as a vanity plate . . . one she might consider to "express" her belief.

As to "IAMGOD" and "BIOTCH" . . .

Who isn't a "God" and why would you consider "Bio Tech" as offensive?

I don't consider any of it offensive language, personally. Godless people, God-loving/fearing people, making a (figurative) meal outta theists, supremely confident mofos, bitchy bio-tech workers...

Hell, I'd let 'em all through if there was no criteria or set of guidelines in place to make the evaluation as objective and non-discriminatory as possible. Of course, someone else in the same role two cities over might reject them all. That pesky subjectivity again; it can be a gateway to discrimination claims -- no doubt about it.

Anyway, I'm interested in hearing the MVC's explanation when they respond to the allegations in Morgan's complaint. Who knows? Maybe they will come back and claim that the reviewer(s) thought "8^THEIST" was a reference to having eaten religious people or feeling heightred towards them.

[BlueTiki]

Bullshit. Argue it until your blu in the face Tiki, doesn't make it any less discriminatory. If one baptist can pay the price and get a religious statement on a vanity plate an athiest should not be denied the same opportunity for the same price.

Arguing? Hardly.

I illuminated the complete lack of supporting documentation from the alleged offended and offender.

I offered alternative explanations due to the aforementioned lack of documentation.

I see no tangible evidence or smoking gun basis to support either side's position.

But you . . .

You morphed your opinion from State assisted "right to express herself in any way she wants" to the more specific "religious statement".

As this heathen twat is a proclaimed Atheist and Atheism is NOT a religion, your position now becomes one of godless bitch's freedom to express an anti-religious statement.

I can live with that.

Perverted mainstream religious institutions loathe and condemn those who are not of like mind.

Therefore, following your position of expressing a religious statement, I believe they, too, should have the freedom to express their beliefs on a vanity plate . . . unabashed and unafraid of censorship.

"JEWH8R", "H8ISLAM", "H8JESUS", "X KLR" . . . perfectly acceptable under your "freedom" rules.

My contempt and loathe for organized religion is well documented throughout this site. My position on the responsibility of the State, towards its citizens, too.

But this is obviously a personal issue for you.

Why else would you state a baptist (when it was the self-proclaimed atheist) was allowed to express a religious statement via a vanity plate?

So, Sport . . . why are you so mad at God that you melt down and babble like Maytee?

Did you lose a spouse and a child by a drunken clergy member?

Or did the fondling priest dump you for a prettier boy?