Stephen ‘Birdshit’ Green demands evidence of “no God”

I’m a bit late to the game with this, although I have been watching the various reactions on the web with not a little amusement. Actually, I’ve been chuckling for hours, which makes drinking a nice hot tea a somewhat noisy and messy affair.

As the “atheist bus” campaigns promulgate their way across the UK and several other countries (except Australia it seems) Stephen Green, head honcho of Christian Fundie Wingnuts Inc. Christian Voice has decided to stick his 2,000 year old oar into the mix and decided to make this an issue of state (even with a NGO like the ASA) and, as a secularist, this has piqued me.

It turns out that Green doesn’t like the “atheist bus” campaign¹ because he’s determined that the campaign slogan falls short of the Advertising Standards Authority’s (ASA) code of conduct.

‘According to one national newspaper, ’some atheist supporters of the campaign were disappointed that the wording of the adverts did not declare categorically that God does not exist, although there were fears that this could break advertising guidelines.’

‘Well, I believe the ad breaks the Advertising Code anyway, unless the advertisers hold evidence that God probably does not exist.

‘The ASA does not just cover goods and services, it covers all advertising. The advertisers cannot hide behind the ASA’s ‘matters of opinion’ exclusion, because no person or body is named as the author of the statement. It is given as a statement of fact and that means it must be capable of substantiation if it is not to break the rules.

‘There is plenty of evidence for God, from peoples’ personal experience, to the complexity, interdependence, beauty and design of the natural world. But there is scant evidence on the other side, so I think the advertisers are really going to struggle to show their claim is not an exaggeration or inaccurate, as the ASA code puts it. — Stephen ‘Birdshit’ Green in a Christian Voice press release

What possible outcomes can there be to this? It turns out that I can see there are three possibilities:

1) The ASA can dismiss the complaint as frivolous and unsubstatiated (after all, it’s an opinion rather than a claim of fact) which Green wouldn’t like. I can’t see the ASA willingly putting their power and reputation on the line for a chance to rule as to whether or not any gods possibly exist.

If I were a betting man, this is the one that I’d put money on. The other two are a little more convoluted.

2) The ASA can accept the complaint but dismiss it, which Green wouldn’t like. The likely effect of this is that this would weaken the ASA as they would then be in the game of theological opining which is certainly not their forte (although they already give themselves a get-out clause in statute for, you’ve guessed it, religious — and no other kinds of — ideas).

3) The ASA can accept the complaint and uphold it, which would mean that Green would get his wish, but with the likely consequence that others, especially people like me who supported the “atheist bus” campaign would then go out of our way to demand to the ASA that religious advertising is subject to the exact same rigours that the ASA deems necessary for irreligious advertising.

This apparently doesn’t bother Green. According to the same press release above:

The Christian evangelist is not concerned by fears that his complaint will lead to atheists complaining about Christian adverts. ‘I am sure many of them have complained about Christian advertising already,’ he said, ‘but a statement such as “The Bible says ‘the wages of sin is death but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord’” is entirely factual. The Bible does say that. The statement “Jesus said, ‘I am the way, the truth and the life – no-one comes to the Father but by me,’” to take another example, is a Biblical quote, from the same Bible which is part of our Christian Constitution and upon which witnesses promise to tell the truth in Court. The Bible is, to coin a phrase, our Bible.’

While it’s not true (although facts and reality don’t seem to be much of a burden on Green’s opinions) that in the UK one is compelled to swear on a bible in a court of law, nor that we have a christian (or even any written) constitution, it’s unfortunately the case that those are not the only things claimed by evangelists of any flavour.

And it can even be argued that even in Green’s second example above (The statement “Jesus said, ‘I am the way, the truth and the life – no-one comes to the Father but by me,’” … is a Biblical quote) that while the christian scripture claims this, the claim itself is unsubstantiated unless that same scripture is determined, by the ASA, to be objectively substantiated. The same press release cites the relevant ASA code:

SUBSTANTIATION
3.1 Before distributing or submitting a marketing communication for publication, marketers must hold documentary evidence to prove all claims, whether direct or implied, that are capable of objective substantiation.

Relevant evidence should be sent without delay if requested by the ASA or CAP. The adequacy of evidence will be judged on whether it supports both the detailed claims and the overall impression created by the marketing communication.

…

TRUTHFULNESS
7.1 No marketing communication should mislead, or be likely to mislead, by inaccuracy, ambiguity, exaggeration, omission or otherwise.

As TW over at Why Don’t You points out:

I assume Christian Voice have lodged similar complaints over any advertising that mentions non-Christian religions, so any posters for Mosques, Temples (etc) will have to come down. I would never suggest people be petty enough to go through Christian advertising with a fine tooth comb – each day on the way to work I see a huge poster telling me that I will die for my sins, where is the proof of that I wonder?

This third ruling would undermine the substantiation clause and open the floodgates to a whole slew of other unsubstantiated adverting by the likes of the sugar-pill merchants and other merchants of woo, and there are a whole host of people who would then be joining the “show us or shut up” lobby and flooding the ASA with complaints.

None of these potential outcomes are good for Green. Either he is told to (1) shut up, (2) put up, or (3) provide evidence for his claims, which we all know that he won’t or can’t do.

Perhaps Green is feeling that a little payback is due to the ASA, as the press release also mentions:

In an peculiar twist, the ASA is currently investigating an advertorial Christian Voice placed in the New Statesman, after just one complaint that a prediction about teenage infertility could not be substantiated. The Council are due to meet to consider its officials’ recommendation to censure the ad next week.

As the BBC notes, Green’s claims provoked peals of laughter withing the walls of the offices of the British Humanist Association. And, as MediaWatchWatch observe:

It is becoming increasingly hard to dismiss the idea that Green is actually a campaigning atheist, using clever subterfuge to make Christianity and Christians look ridiculous.

Seriously, I’d love to be a fly on the wall at these ASA meetings.

/hattip MediaWatchWatch, Why Don’t You?, Sean the Blogonaut, BBC

1. I have my own opinions about it, but this isn’t the place [↩]

Possibly related posts:

1. Telegraph: God-botherers upset over pen marks in book of fairy tales ...
2. If Stephen ‘Birdshit’ Green were to get his way with the ASA ...
3. Stephen Green: petition his petition ...
4. Stephen ‘dogshit’ Green faces bankruptcy ...
5. The Evidence Race ...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Comments