Group of atheists has filed a lawsuit

And Taq hits the bullseye.Of course, refusing to recognize the rights of people of other faiths (or no faith) makes sense if your religion is founded on the belief that everyone else is wrong.

But aren't the some 4,200 world religions almost all based on the idea that theirs is the one true religion, and the others are somehow lacking?And aren't the some 40,000+ denominations of Christianity also based on the idea that they are right and the other 39,999+ are wrong somewhere?Too bad they don't have some empirical means of determining which is right and which is wrong. They could straighten out this mess!

Has anyone else tried?

The problem, of course, is that empiricism leads inevitably to the conclusion that they are all wrong, so that just won't work.

From Mod's Message 11:

quote:

---

Plaintiff American Atheists opposed inclusion of a cross on the grounds
that other religious groups were not given the opportunity for a similar faithbased
memorial at the site of an American tragedy.

---

quote:

---

On multiple occasions, plaintiff American Atheists publicly offered to
provide a memorial for the September 11 Memorial and Museum, at its own
cost, to represent the approximately 500 non-religious victims of the attack
on the World Trade Center.
Plaintiff American Atheists never received a response.

---

quote:

---

No other religious or non-religious group has been permitted a
memorial.

---

They do --- they could ask me.

Apparently, a number of times and they were ignored.A government agency putting up a christian cross, ignoring requests from citizens they serve for equal consideration.You think this is proper?

Did they really? It says they "publically offered"... Maybe the defendents simply didn't see the offering? I dunno. I don't have a problem with religious symbols on government property by the government.But to allow one and disallow any others is definately wrong. If so, then they've got a good case.I'm not sure that's what's happening here, and it looks to me like this could still be frivolous. Like they're making a mountain out of a molehill as part of their agenda of "the total, absolute separation of government and religion", which I don't support.

Of course not: you're religious and of the same religion in question. Of course not: you're religious and your religion is one of the popular/accepted ones in the country.Do you think other people of different/non religions feel the same way? Apparently not. But that's ok. As long as christians get their way, everyone else should just shut up, right?

No, I'm not religious and there's nothing wrong with it. No, I'm not religious and it doesn't matter what religion it is. I don't think anyone should care, really. Nope. Strike six.Get back under your bridge, troll.

You just can't help but call people names, can you? How old are you? Oh? So you're an atheist now? Might want to change the name to "Atheist Scientist" then. And that's your opinion.....The simple fact of the matter is is that they are using a religious symbol to honor the people who died. There are people who are offended by that symbol (myself included). The government should not have a stake in putting up religious symbols. If you don't care, that's fine (that's what great about this country: you can voice your opinion). But if you want religious symbols put up, they NEED to be privately funded.Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.

Sure I can, as exemplified by all my other posts that don't call people names. You started with addressing me, the person, instead of addressing my argument.You just can't address arguments without addressing the person, can you? No, I'm still a theist. Indeed, and its shows that you were wrong about me. But you really shouldn't be making claims about me in the first place, ass.

Yeah I did.I also notice the words will be, which suggests that what is presently (a cross at a location), that will in the future be a government property.Are you suggesting that if the government purchases land that has a religious symbol on it, then the government is supporting a religion?I wonder why they are attacking this instead of the more obvious like St. Paul’s Church? Maybe its because they are shit disturbers, and this is some frivolous BS?Information on the National Park that is a Christian Church:
Saint Paul's Church National Historic Site - WikipediaSaint Paul's Church National Historic Site (U.S. National Park Service) So the need to quote anyone, is not necessary here because anyone can look it up, got it, thanks. Poor word choice on my part, It is not government support of religion. The cross was already built, it was moved there. I bet the Jews do not care, and if they wanted a Jew symbol, then I am sure they could have one, they get whatever they want here. They are far to intelligent and crafty to make a stink like this.
I thought atheists were people without religion, yet this groups is obviously anti-religion. Thanks Just more shit disturbers. It wasn’t an in depth comparison. I don’t recall the Jews complaining about this, but why would they, they can have a Jewish memorial if they want to, no one is stopping them.This is about a piece of the original building, used to make a symbol, and some assholes trying to keep it off some property, you have to really grab at straws to make this into government support of religion, as there are much better arguments and examples, such as the national park above that is a church.I live in Arlington, Virginia. We have a large cemetery here, it is run by the government. It is called Arlington National Cemetery.
Here is a picture of it: Wow look at all those flags and all those crosses. The outrage!!! OMFG!!! Why isn’t the American Atheists group attacking this obvious government support of religion on state property?This whole thread is a frivolous joke. Suspended again? Shocking!!!I have two examples that are more what you would call government supported religion, than two I-beams made into a cross. Heck our money says in God we Trust on it. Yet this piece is not frivolous!?!wow

If anyone would like to make a suggestion or a complaint can do so here.

quote:

---

You may use either of the following two methods to submit a report:

​

Within the United States, Guam, Puerto Rico and Canada, dial 888-332-3580 (Toll-free)
or
Select the "Make a Report" link on the top of this web page.

---

It would be nice to see some evidence of another religious group being denied placement of their star of david ect...It would go a long ways toward the atheist case.

quote:

---

Museum officials said the cross was being displayed not because of its religious value but the role it played in the aftermath of the attacks.

​

"The mission of the National September 11 Memorial Museum is to tell the history of 9/11 through historic artifacts like the World Trade Center cross. This steel remnant became a symbol of spiritual comfort for the thousands of recovery workers who toiled at ground zero, as well as for people around the world," museum president Joe Daniels said in a statement.

---

It seems from this statement they are confused. If it is not being displayed for its religious value then why would the president Joe Daniels mention the spiritual comfort it provided. If it truly isn't meant to represent religion then flip it 90 degrees maybe. It seems it would be easier just to make a public statement saying they would be willing to allow other faiths or non- faiths to display their icons also, seems like an easy way to appease all involved if they don't have a Christian agenda.

I wonder what that means. 'Tis so. How much do you bet? Two Jewish plaintiffs say they "find the cross, a symbol of Christianity, offensive and repugnant to their beliefs, culture, and traditions, and allege that the symbol marginalizes them as American citizens."Or pro-First Amendment. Oh, noes, the anti-religion!... adding, "also we'd like to start throwing Christians to the lions again like in the good old days" ... oh, wait, I made that up.Really, how butthurt can you get about this? Should we have a whaaambulance standing by just in case? Two reasons. Firstly, whatever the religious right may think, the American flag is not in fact a religious symbol.Secondly, the crosses are on the graves of Christian soldiers. It's optional. Jews get a Star of David. Muslims get a crescent and star. Mormons get the Angel Moroni. This is fine, it's parallel to what the atheists are asking for at the 9/11 memorial. If instead the Army put a cross on the grave of every soldier regardless of religious affiliation, you can bet they would indeed be having the shit sued out of them --- and surely even you can see that that's right.So why not extend the same courtesy to the victims of 9/11?Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.