American Atheists sue over ground zero cross.

Hey you know those crosses on the side of the road where people got hit by cars/died in car accidents? GET RID OF THEM TOO.:roll:

TheHighWind

Those are placed by families, not by government, and yes, some municipalities do remove them.

[QUOTE="scorch-62"]Stupid things like this are why people hate atheists.Jph625

This should be the end of the thread.

.. If this were the case then people hate EVERY ONE.. Because there are extreme people in all groups..

Athiests that complain at the sight of anything religious need to learn the purpose of why separation church and state was actually implemented. It was meant to protect religion and churches from government tyranny. It wasn't meant to "protect" you from walking down the street and seeing a cross.

[QUOTE="TheHighWind"]

Hey you know those crosses on the side of the road where people got hit by cars/died in car accidents? GET RID OF THEM TOO.:roll:

worlock77

Those are placed by families, not by government, and yes, some municipalities do remove them.

I honestly don't care about the cross thing.. I just would like to know the public reaction if they put a Islamic holy sign within the exhibit as well.. Afterall innocent Muslims were killed on 9/11 as well..

It is wrong to only represent one religion, it's either all or none.

The first amendment is more important than Christianity.

Blue-Sky

And people wonder why so many religious people are not fond of athesist as a whole...

Unreal I hate people like this that feel like they need to ruin something because of they dont want to see it...

Christmas used to be such a great time even for non religious believers and many athesist groups have gone out of their way to ruin these things

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="TheHighWind"]

Hey you know those crosses on the side of the road where people got hit by cars/died in car accidents? GET RID OF THEM TOO.:roll:

sSubZerOo

Those are placed by families, not by government, and yes, some municipalities do remove them.

I honestly don't care about the cross thing.. I just would like to know the public reaction if they put a Islamic holy sign within the exhibit as well.. Afterall innocent Muslims were killed on 9/11 as well..

Athiests that complain at the sight of anything religious need to learn the purpose of why separation church and state was actually implemented. It was meant to protect religion and churches from government tyranny. It wasn't meant to "protect" you from walking down the street and seeing a cross.

BMD004

i think the athiests point is not just about displaying a cross, it is that religon actively harms the world so that anything that promotes religion is offensive because of how evil organized religion is.

can anyone here think of anything that has caused more harm to people than organized religion? i know i can't.

Athiests that complain at the sight of anything religious need to learn the purpose of why separation church and state was actually implemented. It was meant to protect religion and churches from government tyranny. It wasn't meant to "protect" you from walking down the street and seeing a cross.

BMD004

It was also designed to prevent the country from establishing an official Religion. And if you don't stop the overbearance of christian marketing, over other religions then you're slowly turning this country into a christian Theocracy.

And people wonder why so many religious people are not fond of athesist as a whole...

Unreal I hate people like this that feel like they need to ruin something because of they dont want to see it...

Christmas used to be such a great time even for non religious believers and many athesist groups have gone out of their way to ruin these things

fueled-system

i think the athiests point is not just about displaying a cross, it is that religon actively harms the world so that anything that promotes religion is offensive because of how evil organized religion is.

can anyone here think of anything that has caused more harm to people than organized religion? i know i can't.

Riverwolf007

[QUOTE="nintendofreak_2"]

Good. Somebody has to make sure all the people that died in the 9/11 attacks are all represented in a way they would find fitting. I know I would be pretty pissed if I had a cross put on my grave, and I'm sure the other non-religious victims would feel the same way.

LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

Those are placed by families, not by government, and yes, some municipalities do remove them.

LJS9502_basic

I honestly don't care about the cross thing.. I just would like to know the public reaction if they put a Islamic holy sign within the exhibit as well.. Afterall innocent Muslims were killed on 9/11 as well..

What difference does that make? The wreckage is being chosen due to its religious shape it took.. They could have picked thousands of different of pieces of wreckage, yet chose this one... For obviously its religious significance..

[QUOTE="BMD004"]

Athiests that complain at the sight of anything religious need to learn the purpose of why separation church and state was actually implemented. It was meant to protect religion and churches from government tyranny. It wasn't meant to "protect" you from walking down the street and seeing a cross.

Blue-Sky

It was also designed to prevent the country from establishing an official Religion. And if you don't stop the overbearance of christian marketing, over other religions then you're slowly turning this country into a christian Theocracy.

[QUOTE="BMD004"]

Athiests that complain at the sight of anything religious need to learn the purpose of why separation church and state was actually implemented. It was meant to protect religion and churches from government tyranny. It wasn't meant to "protect" you from walking down the street and seeing a cross.

Blue-Sky

It was also designed to prevent the country from establishing an official Religion. And if you don't stop the overbearance of christian marketing, over other religions then you're slowly turning this country into a christian Theocracy.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

I honestly don't care about the cross thing.. I just would like to know the public reaction if they put a Islamic holy sign within the exhibit as well.. Afterall innocent Muslims were killed on 9/11 as well..

sSubZerOo

What difference does that make? The wreckage is being chosen due to its religious shape it took.. They could have picked thousands of different of pieces of wreckage, yet chose this one... For obviously its religious significance..

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] If it was part of the wreckage that would be fine with me.....LJS9502_basic

What difference does that make? The wreckage is being chosen due to its religious shape it took.. They could have picked thousands of different of pieces of wreckage, yet chose this one... For obviously its religious significance..

So what your saying they blindfolded themselves and just PICKED a piece of wreckage at random.. And it just HAPPENED to be in the form of a Christian Cross? :roll: Yeah ok what ever you say.. To me the exhibit is a memorial, and it really should have the symbols of the faiths to the innocents who were killed on it..

[QUOTE="Blue-Sky"]

[QUOTE="BMD004"]

Athiests that complain at the sight of anything religious need to learn the purpose of why separation church and state was actually implemented. It was meant to protect religion and churches from government tyranny. It wasn't meant to "protect" you from walking down the street and seeing a cross.

LJS9502_basic

It was also designed to prevent the country from establishing an official Religion. And if you don't stop the overbearance of christian marketing, over other religions then you're slowly turning this country into a christian Theocracy.

It shouldn't be happening now. But it is still damaging the US education system.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Blue-Sky"]

It was also designed to prevent the country from establishing an official Religion. And if you don't stop the overbearance of christian marketing, over other religions then you're slowly turning this country into a christian Theocracy.

tenaka2

It shouldn't be happening now. But it is still damaging the US education system.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

What difference does that make? The wreckage is being chosen due to its religious shape it took.. They could have picked thousands of different of pieces of wreckage, yet chose this one... For obviously its religious significance..

sSubZerOo

So what your saying they blindfolded themselves and just PICKED a piece of wreckage at random.. And it just HAPPENED to be in the form of a Christian Cross? :roll: Yeah ok what ever you say.. To me the exhibit is a memorial, and it really should have the symbols of the faiths to the innocents who were killed on it..

Is it part of the wreckage...yes or no?:roll:LJS9502_basic

It is ridiculous and should not be allowed in the museum. There was a lot of wreckage that day, and picking this particular piece and having it blessed by a christian minister, while no other religion is offered the same kind of representation. Is blatant religious favoritism.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Is it part of the wreckage...yes or no?:roll:nintendofreak_2

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Is it part of the wreckage...yes or no?:roll:nintendofreak_2

The hilarious part is if this were in the shape of the Islamic symbol, it would be on the front page of news in saying that its a disgrace to the US.. That its basically saying that the terrorist one and other ridiculous things..

[QUOTE="nintendofreak_2"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Is it part of the wreckage...yes or no?:roll:LJS9502_basic

Fortunately I really could care less about your opinions LJ, they were directed towards the public in general.. In how the reaction by the media would be.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="nintendofreak_2"]Yes, and they chose that piece of wreckage specifically because it represents something in the Christian faith. They could have chosen any piece of wreckage.

sSubZerOo

Fortunately I really could care less about your opinions LJ, they were directed towards the public in general.. In how the reaction by the media would be.

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]

i think the athiests point is not just about displaying a cross, it is that religon actively harms the world so that anything that promotes religion is offensive because of how evil organized religion is.

can anyone here think of anything that has caused more harm to people than organized religion? i know i can't.

SF_KiLLaMaN

"The Vatican's treasure of solid gold has been estimated by the United Nations World Magazine to amount to several billion dollars. A large bulk of this is stored in gold ingots with the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank, while banks in England and Switzerland hold the rest. But this is just a small portion of the wealth of the Vatican, which in the U.S. alone, is greater than that of the five wealthiest giant corporations of the country. When to that is added all the real estate, property, stocks and shares abroad, then the staggering accumulation of the wealth of the Catholic church becomes so formidable as to defy any rational assessment".

yuuuup greed is bad. :P

http://www.dailypaul.com/107294/is-the-catholic-church-the-richest-organization-in-the-world

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Is it part of the wreckage...yes or no?:roll:nintendofreak_2

It also inspired (allegedly) many of the first responders in the immediate aftermath, giving it further historical significance.

I'm making an assumption here, but I'm guessing that there will be who-knows-how-many photographs of what went on down there. I know that there were many, many members of the clergy down near Ground Zero helping the first responders in any way they could. Should all photographs that depict a priest or rabbi or cleric be banned as well? They WERE there. What is the point of this museum? Is it not to serve, at least in part, as a reminder of the histoy of what happened during that brief period?

[QUOTE="nintendofreak_2"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Is it part of the wreckage...yes or no?:roll:LJS9502_basic

That's ridiculous. Tell them to suck it up.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="nintendofreak_2"]Yes, and they chose that piece of wreckage specifically because it represents something in the Christian faith. They could have chosen any piece of wreckage.

nintendofreak_2

[QUOTE="BMD004"]

Athiests that complain at the sight of anything religious need to learn the purpose of why separation church and state was actually implemented. It was meant to protect religion and churches from government tyranny. It wasn't meant to "protect" you from walking down the street and seeing a cross.

Blue-Sky

It was also designed to prevent the country from establishing an official Religion. And if you don't stop the overbearance of christian marketing, over other religions then you're slowly turning this country into a christian Theocracy.

[QUOTE="tenaka2"]

From article:

Silverman said that if the 9/11 Memorial foundation allows all other religious memorials of equal size and prominence to be displayed in the museum, the group would "happily, happily, drop the case."

"It's an all or nothing deal. They can remove the cross, or they can let everybody else in. Either way is legal and we would drop the case," Silverman said.

Nibroc420

It doesn't mean the people who aren't Christian are being remembered by a Christian icon...it's just an artifact from 9/11...why the hell shouldn't it be in the 9/11 museum? It was an important part of that day to many of the men/women working on ground zero. It's part of history.

I'm atheist, and I could care less.

imagine someone was making a holocaust memorial, and there are star of david banners everywhere. and then a gypsy family threatened to sue because thats not their religion. its just rediculous.

But this piece of wreckage showed strength by way of it's structural connections remaining intact, almost symbolic of the strength of the nation during an attack.

It also inspired (allegedly) many of the first responders in the immediate aftermath, giving it further historical significance.

I'm making an assumption here, but I'm guessing that there will be who-knows-how-many photographs of what went on down there. I know that there were many, many members of the clergy down near Ground Zero helping the first responders in any way they could. Should all photographs that depict a priest or rabbi or cleric be banned as well? They WERE there. What is the point of this museum? Is it not to serve, at least in part, as a reminder of the histoy of what happened during that brief period?

Planet_Pluto

It inspired them because they were Christian and they recognized it as a cross.

I'm not advocating removing religion from the museum. So long as they aren't willing holding back photos of a certain religion or group, then I have no problem. Even if the Westboro church members helped clean the wreckage, they should be represented as long as all the groups that were photographed helping are represented equally. As things stand now, this isn't the case.

imagine someone was making a holocaust memorial, and there are star of david banners everywhere. and then a gypsy family threatened to sue because thats not their religion. its just rediculous.

taterfrickintot

:| What? You do understand that innocentMuslims, Jews, Atheists, agnostics etc etc died on the attacks of 9/11 too? If this is being specifically chosen for its religious shape its form, do you think thats kind of prejudicial?

[QUOTE="nintendofreak_2"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] Doesn't matter. I stated earlier....and he argued my opinion...that I'd be fine with a Muslim symbol if it was part of the wreckage.LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="nintendofreak_2"]I'm fine with religious symbols in the museum provided that they are featured equally, together, and all the victims beliefs are represented. Currently, only the Christian and Jewish faiths are planned to be represented, and the article states that 500 victims were non-religious, and at the very least they need to represented as well by a non-religious symbol such as an American flag (or a flag of their nationality). And it's a pretty safe assumption that other victims had other religions, and they need to be represented as well.

nintendofreak_2

[QUOTE="imaps3fanboy"]

[QUOTE="dommeus"]

Atheist extremists are just as bad as any other kind of extremist.

Nibroc420

They're as bad as Islamist terrorists? Don't think so

[QUOTE="taterfrickintot"]

imagine someone was making a holocaust memorial, and there are star of david banners everywhere. and then a gypsy family threatened to sue because thats not their religion. its just rediculous.

sSubZerOo

:| What? You do understand that innocentMuslims, Jews, Atheists, agnostics etc etc died on the attacks of 9/11 too? If this is being specifically chosen for its religious shape its form, do you think thats kind of prejudicial?

[QUOTE="Planet_Pluto"]

But this piece of wreckage showed strength by way of it's structural connections remaining intact, almost symbolic of the strength of the nation during an attack.

It also inspired (allegedly) many of the first responders in the immediate aftermath, giving it further historical significance.

I'm making an assumption here, but I'm guessing that there will be who-knows-how-many photographs of what went on down there. I know that there were many, many members of the clergy down near Ground Zero helping the first responders in any way they could. Should all photographs that depict a priest or rabbi or cleric be banned as well? They WERE there. What is the point of this museum? Is it not to serve, at least in part, as a reminder of the histoy of what happened during that brief period?

nintendofreak_2

It inspired them because they were Christian and they recognized it as a cross.

I'm not advocating removing religion from the museum. So long as they aren't willing holding back photos of a certain religion or group, then I have no problem. Even if the Westboro church members helped clean the wreckage, they should be represented as long as all the groups that were photographed helping are represented equally. As things stand now, this isn't the case.

But the fact that certain religious people were there, while others were not, means we should white-wash away the presense of the ones that were there?

Also, I don't think it's been implied anywhere that any other religious artifacts, symobls, people that were present during that time are being 'held back.' Of course, I've only read a few articles about this whole thing.

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"][QUOTE="imaps3fanboy"]

They're as bad as Islamist terrorists? Don't think so

00-Riddick-00

[QUOTE="taterfrickintot"]

imagine someone was making a holocaust memorial, and there are star of david banners everywhere. and then a gypsy family threatened to sue because thats not their religion. its just rediculous.

sSubZerOo

:| What? You do understand that innocentMuslims, Jews, Atheists, agnostics etc etc died on the attacks of 9/11 too? If this is being specifically chosen for its religious shape its form, do you think thats kind of prejudicial?

It's being chosen because it's a part of history. It was PART OF THE GOD DAMN WRECKAGE. This wreckage in the shape of a cross was important to many ground zero workers. They didn't just construct a cross out of random materials and put it up in the museum.

I mean my god people, this is pretty clear cut and simple. It is part of history...the "atom" they want to display is not...

While I understand the differences, part of this arguement reminds me of the arguements going on a few years back, when somewhere in the city (or was it NJ?) when a local municipality wanted to commission a statue depicting the photo above.

The plan was to bring the photo to life via a bronze statue, trying to make it as accurate as possible.

However, since the picture consists only of three white males, all sorts of lawsuits were filed claiming various forms of 'discrimination.' (Now that I think about it, I'll have to try and find out what ultimately happened).

In any event, what is the point of History in general, if we are going to change it "willy-nilly."....?

While I understand the differences, part of this arguement reminds me of the arguements going on a few years back, when somewhere in the city (or was it NJ?) when a local municipality wanted to commission a statue depicting the photo above.

The plan was to bring the photo to life via a bronze statue, trying to make it as accurate as possible.

However, since the picture consists only of three white males, all sorts of lawsuits were filed claiming various forms of 'discrimination.' (Now that I think about it, I'll have to try and find out what ultimately happened).

In any event, what is the point of History in general, if we are going to change it "willy-nilly."....?

Planet_Pluto

Wow. That's ridiculous. Making a big deal out of them being white males is actually "discrimination". Why should there skin color and gender matter in this case if that's the race/gender that was there?

Just so I understand what you are saying, had people from "all faiths" happened to have been there, and all were represented in the museum, then it would be ok.

But the fact that certain religious people were there, while others were not, means we should white-wash away the presense of the ones that were there?

Also, I don't think it's been implied anywhere that any other religious artifacts, symobls, people that were present during that time are being 'held back.' Of course, I've only read a few articles about this whole thing.

Planet_Pluto

I'm not saying any are. I'm saying that if they had photos of a religious group assisting with the clean up and they chose to hold those photos back while representing other groups, then that's an issue.

I read the first 5 pages and got a head ache. Stop arguing people. Arguing is not going to make the atheists deside not to sue and its not going to make everyone's religion equaly represented at the museum.

[QUOTE="Planet_Pluto"]

While I understand the differences, part of this arguement reminds me of the arguements going on a few years back, when somewhere in the city (or was it NJ?) when a local municipality wanted to commission a statue depicting the photo above.

The plan was to bring the photo to life via a bronze statue, trying to make it as accurate as possible.

However, since the picture consists only of three white males, all sorts of lawsuits were filed claiming various forms of 'discrimination.' (Now that I think about it, I'll have to try and find out what ultimately happened).

In any event, what is the point of History in general, if we are going to change it "willy-nilly."....?

SpartanMSU

Wow. That's ridiculous. Making a big deal out of them being white males is actually "discrimination". Why should there skin color and gender matter in this case if that's the race/gender that was there?

9/11 happened.

The buildings came down.

During the immediate aftermath these two intersecting structural steel members were found.

To SOME of the people working there, it provided much needed inspiration.

Images of it and stories about it were in news broadcasts and printed pages all over the country (possibly around the world).

A decade later it is put in a museum.

I fail to see the 'offense' in all of this really.