|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,482 Year: 3,739/9,624 Month: 610/974 Week: 223/276 Day: 63/34 Hour: 2/4 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 4167 days) Posts: 990 From: Burlington, NC, USA Joined: |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Group of atheists has filed a lawsuit | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Nuggin Member (Idle past 2515 days) Posts: 2965 From: Los Angeles, CA USA Joined: |
Did someone find a Koran on site? Did some Koran act as a landmark recognizable to all those working on the site? Oh, so now it has to be "big" too. And if there was a big Koran, it would have to be made of metal to count? And if it was made of metal, it would have to be T shaped.
That is your view of the Cross based upon your personal religious beliefs. Something I share, by the way. But, this does not alter the historical facts of what was on site. Whether the connotations attached are good or bad means nothing. Only the facts of the history of the item matter. Untrue. Look, this cross is going to be mounted in a way that makes Christians feel good about it being in the museum. Which means it's going to be mounted in a way that makes other people feel bad about it being mounted in the museum. If the museum put up a shrine to the photos of the hijackers, meaning some nice candles and "you will be missed" on the wall, people would have an absolute SHIT FIT. That's because people would find it offensive. Well, people find this offensive. Just because the people who think it's important are smart enough of intellectually honest enough to acknowledge that it's presence at the site does not have the meaning they claim it has, doesn't mean that non- Christians should be forced to accept their ignorance. There are literally BILLIONS of artifacts from the site which have historical significance. Only the tiniest sliver of them is going to be present in the museum. Why include this one that's offensive?
Prove a negative? Is that the best intellectual argument you can make? Do you have any such artifact? If so then this as well should be considered for the museum, should it not? Making a broad statement based on facts not in evidence? Is that the best intellectual argument you can make? You've already set down the impossible guidelines for what is "acceptable". It must be big and metal and shaped like a cross. No, there are no non-Christian artifacts which are big and metal and shaped like a cross. You've got me there.
Oh, I agree. But what does this have to do with the unique role of this artifact on that site at that time? But the ONLY role this artifact has is that some Christians feel it's significant. It's not OBJECTIVELY significant. A piece of the plane is objectively significant. A failed mounting bracket is objectively significant. A burned crushed NYFD helmet is objectively significant. This is not objectively significant. You know how I know? There's a group of us telling you so.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8536 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.0 |
Oh, so now it has to be "big" too. And if there was a big Koran, it would have to be made of metal to count? And if it was made of metal, it would have to be T shaped. There was a bible fused to a beam, as I understand. It is in the museum. If a Koran was found is a somewhat similar circumstance then I see no reason for it not to be included. It doesn't have to be "T" shaped, no.
Look, this cross is going to be mounted in a way that makes Christians feel good about it being in the museum. Which means it's going to be mounted in a way that makes other people feel bad about it being mounted in the museum. So what? Let me ask: Is the purpose of the museum to preserve the history of the event or to revise it and slant it to make it more palatable to you?
You've already set down the impossible guidelines for what is "acceptable". It must be big and metal and shaped like a cross. Never said that. Please stop trying to mis-represent my positions.
But the ONLY role this artifact has is that some Christians feel it's significant. It's not OBJECTIVELY significant. Since it was there at that site at that time, I disagree. It had a religious connotation then and now. So what? Was it not there? Did it not serve a significant purpose, albeit a religious one? If something in history offends you do you just ignore it? Hope it goes away?
A piece of the plane is objectively significant. A failed mounting bracket is objectively significant. A burned crushed NYFD helmet is objectively significant. For the same reasons as the other artifact, I totally agree.
This is not objectively significant. You know how I know? There's a group of us telling you so. So what? I think y'all are wrong because your objections center on personal religious reasons not on unemotional historical reasons. I disagree for the reasons I stated. We're allowed to do that here.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Nuggin Member (Idle past 2515 days) Posts: 2965 From: Los Angeles, CA USA Joined: |
There was a bible fused to a beam, as I understand. It is in the museum. If a Koran was found is a somewhat similar circumstance then I see no reason for it not to be included. It doesn't have to be "T" shaped, no. Yes, the display includes a bible, a cross, a star of david cut from crossbeam metal, a Jewish prayer shawl. No Koran. No statues of Vishnu. No Buddhas. So, the message is clear: This attack is about a war between the Jews/Christians and the Muslims. The rest of you can go fuck yourselves. Too bad you died for our war. This is our country not yours. blah blah blah
Is the purpose of the museum to preserve the history of the event or to revise it and slant it to make it more palatable to you? The purpose of the museum is to slant it to make it more palatable for Christians and Jews. They literally CUT a star of david out of metal. That's not a found object. That's a specific message: "Yes, this attack happened because the Muslims are mad that the Americans support Israel, and we aren't going to back down on that support" Expressed another way: One group of childish fairy tale believers is made at another group that also believes in the same fairy tales for supporting a third group that also believes in the same fairy tales, so the first group killed a lot of people who either don't believe in fairy tales at all, or believe in a completely different set of fairy tales.
If something in history offends you do you just ignore it? Hope it goes away? No, but I don't lionize it. The stuff in the holocaust museum is historic and offensive, but it's not presented in a "Wee! Holocaust!" way. It's not presented as "Thank God for the Holocaust". It's presented as EVIL. This is an object of evil and it's being presented as though it were a holy relic.
So what? I think y'all are wrong because your objections center on personal religious reasons not on unemotional historical reasons. I disagree for the reasons I stated. We're allowed to do that here. Yes. You are allowed to do that. Doesn't make you any less wrong. If there were NO Christians at the site whatsoever, this object wouldn't have any significance. If there were NO Christians, a firemans hat would still have the EXACT same amount o significance.If there were NO Christians, a failed brachet would have the exact same amount of significance. Ditto a piece of plane, or a pic of Guilianni, or of someone covered in ash, etc etc etc. This object is only significant because Christians are pretending that it is. That makes it entirely subjective.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8536 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.0 |
Now, see, unlike with Rrhain and his incessant repetition, we can disagree on this then go about our other lives.
Thank you, Nuggin. [ABE] This Cross of David thing. Is it intended for the museum proper or for the Memorial Garden? If it is in the museum then that is inappropriate me-too-ism by the jews and really sucks. If it's for the Memorial Garden then that's fine. We will need to add a mid-sized granite Buddah, a small marble sculpture of a Koran, a gold guilded coathanger sculpture of the FSM for some and a life-sized bronze broomstick for the Wiccans as well. Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
AZPaul3 continues to avoid the very simple question:
quote: Then you should be able to tell us what the other significance of the object is. What are you waiting for?
quote: Refuted in Message 181.
quote: And refuted again in Message 183.
quote: And then refuted yet again in Message 195. You need to come up with something new. What other significance does this item have?
quote:quote: Then you have no argument.
quote: Refuted in Message 181.
quote: And refuted again in Message 183.
quote: And then refuted yet again in Message 195. You need to come up with something new. What other significance does this item have?
quote: Yep. When faced with a request for you to justify your claims, you will run away rather than stand up for your own argument. Do you want to go around again or do you want to answer the question? It's really very simple: What other significance does this object have?Rrhain Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time. Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8536 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.0 |
AZPaul3 continues to avoid the very simple question This supposition is not supported by the evidence presented.
What other significance does this item have? Answered in Message 177 and again in Message 182 and then yet again in Message 193 with yet another explanation in Message 358.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
Catholic Scientist responds to me:
quote: Shouldn't that be a hint to you?
quote: So why do you think there's a lawsuit? You seem to have a very skewed set of rules for whose word you'll take.
quote: Why is that sufficient? What about the rubble where Bush gave his speech? That's much more historically significant and it isn't being displayed. Why should a crossbeam that had no important event take place at it be venerated?
quote: To whom? There were plenty of other bits that did the same thing and they're not being displayed. What's so special about this one?
quote: How did it help the recovery effort? Was anybody found because of it?
quote: Yes, it is. The only reason an object is in a museum is because it is significant. Otherwise, it's just a piece of junk and should be carted away the way the rest of the rubble was. It's being placed in the museum because people think it is significant but it seems the only significance this particular article has is religious in nature. That makes it significant for a church, not a museum.
quote: Why do you think there's a lawsuit? It's impossible for them to have made a mistake?
quote: No, not that it's "too religious." That it has no significance other than its theological patina. Suppose there were a church that was a waystation on the Underground Railroad. It clearly is soaked in religion, but its historical significance is sufficient that we don't care and it would be ludicrous not to do what we can to preserve it for future generations.
quote: And your redefinition of "black" as "white" doesn't make it so. The spiritual is non-secular by definition.
quote: No, I'm not. It could be the perserved remains of the Pope. If there is some sort of significance that isn't solely religious in nature, then that is sufficient to be included in a museum. If the only significance is theological, that is a reason to put it in a church.
quote: Neither do I. It makes one wonder why you seem to think that is what my argument is. Where did I even hint at such a conclusion?
quote: Insufficient. Plenty of other places did the same thing and some were of much more historical worth. Why is this one being venerated over the others?
quote: To whom? There were plenty of other bits that did the same thing and they're not being displayed. What's so special about this one? What "recovery efforts" were enhanced? Was anybody found because of this object?
quote: No, it was taken by a church where it was then given a blessing. How is that historical in nature?
quote: Huh? It was being displayed at a church before the museum requested it. Why not keep it where it was so that it could do the most good?
quote: Are you seriously claiming that there are no pieces of rubble to be found? That this crossbeam is literally the only thing left and thus if we want to display a piece of the rubble, it is the only one to be had?
quote:quote:Maybe because the dumpers were unaware of the significance... And this piece is the only thing we have left? You seriously believe that?
quote: What significnace does this particular item have that can't be fulfilled by another piece that doesn't have the problem of being seemingly solely a religious item?Rrhain Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time. Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
Catholic Scientist writes:
quote: You don't see a difference between the italicized portion and the bolded? The former is non-secular while the latter is solely sectarian. What's a sectarian piece doing in a secular museum? If it's just to show a piece of rubble, knock it over. Does this item lose its importance if it's displayed as an X rather than a T? If so, then it doesn't have any historical signficiance of any kind and is solely a religious object. It should have been kept at the church where it was where it could do the most good.Rrhain Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time. Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
AZPaul3 writes:
quote: So what is the history?
quote: That's not history. That's theology. That's a reason to display it in a church, not a museum. What is the history?
quote: That's not history. That's theology. That's a reason to display it in a church, not a museum. What is the history?
quote: But what was its history? You keep describing its theology:
It was a worship station on site. It was a shrine to the fallen on site. No other such artifact existed on site. No other such artifact served this purpose on site. It had a unique meaning on site that no other landmark had on site. These are facts. Indeed, those are facts. They are facts of this item's theological importance and are justifications for it being in a church. The question to you is to provide its historical significance that would justify it being in a museum.
quote: What historical ties does it have? All you have said is that there was a theological importance. What is the historical significance?
quote: Nobody disagrees with this view. Everybody understands the theological importance of this item. What you are being asked to provide is the historical significance such that it would be appropriate to display in a museum rather than a church.
quote: (*chuckle*) Since when is asking for justification for a claim "bullying and intimidation"?Rrhain Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time. Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
AZPaul3 continues to avoid the very simple question:
quote: Then you should be able to tell us what the other significance of the object is. What are you waiting for?
quote: Refuted in Message 181.
quote: And refuted again in Message 183.
quote: And then refuted yet again in Message 195.
quote: That was new, but it was refuted in Message 369. You still haven't actually answered the question, though: What other significance does this item have?Rrhain Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time. Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8536 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.0 |
AZPaul3 continues to avoid the very simple question This supposition is not supported by the evidence presented
What other significance does this item have? Answered in Message 177 and again in Message 182 and then yet again in Message 193 with yet another explanation in Message 358.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8536 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.0 |
AZPaul3 continues to avoid the very simple question This supposition is not supported by the evidence presented
What other significance does this item have? Answered in Message 177 and again in Message 182 and then yet again in Message 193 with yet another explanation in Message 358.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3690 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: The evidence does not support the action. While a religious symbol can be a cause of violation, in America's case it is not valid. The Constitution and the laws of the country does not support one religion's right over another. America is not Saudi Arabia or Iran, nor medevial Europe. The facts on the ground speak for themselves and have an impacting factor here. America represents a Christian country [not a crime per se], which displays wise and fair rules and this must be acknowledged rather than flaunted by exaggerations.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
fearandloathing Member (Idle past 4167 days) Posts: 990 From: Burlington, NC, USA Joined: |
quote: Read more... I guess Grimm has concerns over this case in court and wants to sort of circumvent the case all together. Got to love our elected reps....especially the republicans. (This story is about 3 weeks old.) Edited by fearandloathing, : No reason given."No sympathy for the devil; keep that in mind. Buy the ticket, take the ride...and if it occasionally gets a little heavier than what you had in mind, well...maybe chalk it off to forced conscious expansion: Tune in, freak out, get beaten." Hunter S. Thompson Ad astra per aspera Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Rahvin Member Posts: 4040 Joined: Member Rating: 8.1 |
A law that enshrines an obvious Christian symbol as a national monument would itself face the same Constitutional scrutiny as placing it in a Federally-funded museum. Congress can't actually bypass the Supreme Court without a Constitutional amendment, after all.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024