I’m offended! Yes, offended! And I want this practice ended!
But it’s not because I simply took offense!
Your pretense is, my offense is what’s been bothering my senses
And the truth is, your confusion is immense!
I’ve detected, you’ve neglected to reveal my view’s protected
By the first amendment of our constitution!
In conclusion, your illusion of my motives is delusion!
But I’m sure it fits your sense of persecution.

Rant, after jump:

In poking around the various players in the Annoying Tacky Jesus On Top Of Big Mountain case, I stumbled upon one of Ed’s favorite places, the American Center For Justice And Law, whose title appears to substitute the word “American” where a functional analysis of their site would suggest the term “Christian” would be more apropos (indeed, “Christian” would fit twice more in an appropriate title, before “justice” and “law”). They are making a big deal out of how atheists are offended. That’s their talking point, and they will stick to it.

And (as my verse suggests) I am offended by the things they suggest. But I’m offended by lots of stuff. Seriously. Hell, I love being offended by stuff. It’s why I read half the stuff I read. Comment threads? If you aren’t offended by what some people are saying, you aren’t paying attention. But would I censor them? Of course not; then I wouldn’t get the chance to be offended, and to know that these people exist and are worth fighting.

But I digress. (see, that’s what they want; if they can offend your sensibilities, you might miss the fact that they are trying to distract you from their lack of evidence, logic, or sanity.) It’s not the fact that I am offended by Tacky Jesus On Top Of Big Mountain that makes me want it removed, it’s that Tacky Jesus amounts to government sponsorship of a particular religious view on public property. Yup, it’s not the offense, it’s the violation of the establishment clause. That little thing.

So go ahead and offend me. You can do it right here in the comments, if you like. You can’t do it at the ACLJ site, cos they don’t have comments there. Funny, that. You’d think they’d want people to have the freedom to explain why they are wrong. After all, they don’t think much of people who are easily offended.