American Atheists Sue Over World Trade Center Cross

[mrsleeve]

^
That I totally agree with.

[mar1t1me]

at the time of they pulled this off we were not really that active in their little sand box.

Still believing the gov't version? Odd that Bin Laden was never charged....apparently a problem with the evidence against him....

....unlike the 1998 embassy bombing.

Far, far too many highly educated, professional people have called bullshit on the official account. And when you watch the Islamaphobic talking heads on Fox act as though the Muslim Borg state wants us all dead, but one of the top investors is a Muslim Prince who claims he can dictate what is reported and what is not, it doesn't take a great leap of faith to conclude something stinks.....

Anyway, back on topic, either you represent all the faiths of those killed in the "attacks" or none. It's only fair. Everyone represented is a gesture. Only one represented is an agenda.

[Dozyproductions]

This is what I was getting at in my post. Being "Christian" has become this socially moral standing that puts you above other people. "I am a Christian" holds standing to most of the population. It means you can be trusted. It means you are truthful. You are morally righteous. When it comes down to it these people are not going to church. They probably go on Easter and Christmas so they keep it a little connected.

It is to the point that many churches are now offering, and have been offering, to watch their services on the internet. Someone that is so believing in their faith that there is a guy in the sky that made them and controls their life... but they can't wake up on Sunday morning at 8am to go to church. It's a convenience thing for many of the 3/4 of the country.

Now my opinions are not that all Christians are like this but this is in my personal life.

You had it right in the first paragraph. Who says that you have to go to church to be a good Christian? Yeah there are plently of "Chreasters" but following the true teachings of the bible and believing in god are the only prerequisites for being christian, not going to church every Sunday.

[markseven]

Still believing the gov't version? Odd that Bin Laden was never charged....apparently a problem with the evidence against him....

....unlike the 1998 embassy bombing.

Far, far too many highly educated, professional people have called bullshit on the official account. And when you watch the Islamaphobic talking heads on Fox act as though the Muslim Borg state wants us all dead, but one of the top investors is a Muslim Prince who claims he can dictate what is reported and what is not, it doesn't take a great leap of faith to conclude something stinks.....

Anyway, back on topic, either you represent all the faiths of those killed in the "attacks" or none. It's only fair. Everyone represented is a gesture. Only one represented is an agenda.

He owns less than 2%.

[Kershaw]

i wish i owned 2% of microsoft.

after hearing these replies i agree with turf and maritime.

[mar1t1me]

He owns less than 2%.

What, did he sell off 5%? Last I heard, it was 7% worth $2.3 billion. Also, Murdoch owns a 9%, $70M chunk of Al-Waleed's Saudi media conglomerate.

To refresh, this is the same guy who personally and directly funded the "Terror Mosque" that Fox has been screaming about, and to the tune of over $300K.

But those guys are transparent, right?

[ficklerx]

Back to the original discussion:

The 2-ton, 20-foot-high T-beam has now become a religious relic. It was taken from its temporary post near a church Saturday and lowered 70 feet down into the bowels of where the twin towers once stood to become part of the exhibit at the National September 11th Memorial and Museum.

The museum's 'about us' internet page refers to the National September 11 Memorial & Museum at the World Trade Center Foundation, Inc. which implies that this museum is owned/operated by a private entity; therefore not public property.

My limited knowledge of the lawsuit is one group is suing over what a private entity wants to display on their property. While 'National' could be easily misconstrued that this is a government-owned museum, it is not. This is private property.

Basically, if the atheists are offended, do not visit the museum. And, in our country they are more than welcome to create their own museum to honor and remember the event in any way they seem fit.

[Dozyproductions]

Basically, if the atheists are offended, do not visit the museum. And, in our country they are more than welcome to create their own museum to honor and remember the event in any way they seem fit.

totally missing the point.

[ficklerx]

totally missing the point.

And, what point would that be?

I see a group of like-minded agnostics suing a private entity over the display of a historical object that had important significance to many of the people directly involved with the event. The particular object's significance is religious based. Please tell me how this violates the civil rights of any other religious groups (or non-religious in this case).

The cross was not purposefully 'manufactured' and displayed to promote Christianity over any other religious group, or agnostics in this case. It was found at the site. It has relevance to the subject matter of the museum.

If you bothered to read the links in the first post, you should have found the following comment from the president of memorial foundation.

He said steel girders made into other makeshift crosses, Stars of David and possibly some Eastern religious symbols would also become part of the museum, which will open in 2012 and will be primarily underground at the site. The memorial will open this year, on the 10th anniversary of the attack.

Other faiths will be represented. Unfortunately, these symbols have not yet been manufactured. Are these going to violate the civil rights of Atheists as well? If not, then one must ask if the motive is to only lash out against Christianity.

Would they be appeased with a properly labeled area of nothingness?

[ck_taft325is]

You guys mention morals - but morality exists without religion. Jefferson, for instance, wrote "The Moral Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth" - AKA the jefferson bible - in an effort to separate morality from religion. Many of our founding fathers were deists - so yes, god may be mentioned - but don't make the mistake that they were always referring to the judeo-christian god. It's not like they were all southern baptists.

Side note: I wonder how many people in here believe in God but not Allah?

What?

Building a Mosque near ground zero is only a cause for angst because the christians in this country have been allowed to think and behave that way. Freedom of religion will die if not defended. "Leaving it be" will only allow more actions that are contrary to the intentions of our founding fathers.

Allowed to think and behave that way? All hail ze Fuehrer.

How is this not hypocritical? If christians can erect crosses wherever they want for their "religious fervor" then why can't mosques be built for the same reason? Being for one and aginst the other doesn't make sense.

As for being ashamed - I got hammered for frowning upon the celebration of death when bin laden was killed. It annoys me that you'll generally be rewarded for supporting something equally backwards.

I'm apalled that you would shit in the mouth of everyone that has family who was killed or injured at 9/11 by mourning the death, or even looking down your self righteous, high horsed nose at them for celebrating or even feeling good about the fact that a terrorist, a hateful, filled with the same self righteous bullshit piss and vinegar you yourself seem to exhibit, was shot and killed for his crimes against innocent people who never looked twice at him. Your same argument that not all Muslim's are responsible for 9/11 or whatever else you'd say in defense of "the little guy" religion, can be turned on you when you say that Christian's have incited that or any other attack by what bad men did hundreds of years ago. Right? Or is that double standard beyond you and your obvious bias/hate? And don't say you don't hate anything.

That's exactly what I don't like about it. Christians choose when to be christians and abandon their values when it feels good. You're right - the muslims probably aren't doing the right thing. But then again neither are the christians. All I'm asking is that someone step up and be consistent.

Just like anyone else. Because they say they are Christian you hold them to a higher standard? Show me one Muslim that doesn't do this at all. Show me one Atheist who doesn't claim he has independent "morality" and then forsake it when it benefits him? Show me one personal claiming to be a good person and then turns their back when shit gets hard or that stranger gets mugged or beat and they don't do a fucking thing to help? Yeah. It's all people.


On that note, you're right, Christian's in general are nothing special. Neither is anyone else. Anyone claiming to be, Christian or otherwise, is just the same sack of shit hypocritical liar you claim "all Christians" are. Much like you claiming to be above so many others.

[Turf1600]

What?

That's right.

Allowed to think and behave that way? All hail ze Fuehrer.

I stand by my statement. Someone has to point out the hypocrisy. Group solidarity isn't always parallel with reality.

I'm apalled that you would shit in the mouth of everyone that has family who was killed or injured at 9/11 by mourning the death, or even looking down your self righteous, high horsed nose at them for celebrating or even feeling good about the fact that a terrorist, a hateful, filled with the same self righteous bullshit piss and vinegar you yourself seem to exhibit, was shot and killed for his crimes against innocent people who never looked twice at him.

You hit the nail on the head. People abandon their convictions when it feels good. I don't have to like it and you don't have to like that I don't like it.

Your same argument that not all Muslim's are responsible for 9/11 or whatever else you'd say in defense of "the little guy" religion, can be turned on you when you say that Christian's have incited that or any other attack by what bad men did hundreds of years ago. Right? Or is that double standard beyond you and your obvious bias/hate? And don't say you don't hate anything.

You seem to be arguing points that I didn't make.

Just like anyone else. Because they say they are Christian you hold them to a higher standard? Show me one Muslim that doesn't do this at all. Show me one Atheist who doesn't claim he has independent "morality" and then forsake it when it benefits him? Show me one personal claiming to be a good person and then turns their back when shit gets hard or that stranger gets mugged or beat and they don't do a fucking thing to help? Yeah. It's all people.

I hold people to their own standards - and at the very minimum I expect people to realize or admit that they have behaved immorally. In my experience most christians just manipulate religion to justify their actions as they relate to a given circumstance. Conversely, morality is black and white when it has to do with someone else - especially to those whom they dislike or oppose.

On that note, you're right, Christian's in general are nothing special. Neither is anyone else. Anyone claiming to be, Christian or otherwise, is just the same sack of shit hypocritical liar you claim "all Christians" are. Much like you claiming to be above so many others.

First of all, I never used the word "all". I'm generally careful when it comes to sweeping generalizations. Secondarily, when did I claim to be anything at all? Your argument seems very personal.

[Dozyproductions]

And, what point would that be?

I see a group of like-minded agnostics suing a private entity over the display of a historical object that had important significance to many of the people directly involved with the event. The particular object's significance is religious based. Please tell me how this violates the civil rights of any other religious groups (or non-religious in this case).

The cross was not purposefully 'manufactured' and displayed to promote Christianity over any other religious group, or agnostics in this case. It was found at the site. It has relevance to the subject matter of the museum.

If you bothered to read the links in the first post, you should have found the following comment from the president of memorial foundation.

Other faiths will be represented. Unfortunately, these symbols have not yet been manufactured. Are these going to violate the civil rights of Atheists as well? If not, then one must ask if the motive is to only lash out against Christianity.

Would they be appeased with a properly labeled area of nothingness?

Don't talk cute with me boy.

As a satanist I would like me religion to be represented there because I know a couple of my brothers died resulting the tragedy. The cross in that position is very against my religion and extremely insulting.

[ficklerx]

Don't talk cute with me boy.

LOL! I guess you are easily offended. I only asked what point did you assume I missed.

Feel free to contact the memorial's president. Give him a few designs and he may be able to fab something up for you. Hopefully, you would not find it 'extremely insulting' to have your religion represented with the ones of the others who tragically died that day.

[Dozyproductions]

LOL! I guess you are easily offended. I only asked what point did you assume I missed.

Feel free to contact the memorial's president. Give him a few designs and he may be able to fab something up for you. Hopefully, you would not find it 'extremely insulting' to have your religion represented with the ones of the others who tragically died that day.

notice how my whole post was sarcasm...yo...


Just read Turf's post and if you still don't get it I won't even bother :)

[ck_taft325is]

That's right.




I stand by my statement. Someone has to point out the hypocrisy. Group solidarity isn't always parallel with reality.



You hit the nail on the head. People abandon their convictions when it feels good. I don't have to like it and you don't have to like that I don't like it.



You seem to be arguing points that I didn't make.



I hold people to their own standards - and at the very minimum I expect people to realize or admit that they have behaved immorally. In my experience most christians just manipulate religion to justify their actions as they relate to a given circumstance. Conversely, morality is black and white when it has to do with someone else - especially to those whom they dislike or oppose.




First of all, I never used the word "all". I'm generally careful when it comes to sweeping generalizations. Secondarily, when did I claim to be anything at all? Your argument seems very personal.

Then I hold you to yours.

Don't hate, yo.