|
Author
|
Topic: Group of atheists has filed a lawsuit
|
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member
(1)
| |
| |
| |
Who are they suing and for what?
quote:
The American Atheists, which advocates an "absolute separation" of government and religion,
How's that gonna work? The government is the people and some people are religious...
|
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member
|
|
Message 29 of 479 (626232)
07-27-2011 10:16 PM
|
Reply to: Message 28 by AZPaul3
07-27-2011 9:48 PM
|
|
Is it? Where have the others been disallowed?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 28 by AZPaul3, posted 07-27-2011 9:48 PM | | AZPaul3 has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 30 by AZPaul3, posted 07-27-2011 10:26 PM | | New Cat's Eye has replied |
|
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 33 of 479 (626243)
07-28-2011 12:30 AM
|
Reply to: Message 30 by AZPaul3
07-27-2011 10:26 PM
|
|
Has anyone else tried?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 30 by AZPaul3, posted 07-27-2011 10:26 PM | | AZPaul3 has replied |
|
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 38 of 479 (626292)
07-28-2011 10:10 AM
|
Reply to: Message 37 by AZPaul3
07-28-2011 6:38 AM
|
|
Re: Attitude
Has anyone else tried?
Apparently, a number of times and they were ignored. Did they really? It says they "publically offered"... Maybe the defendents simply didn't see the offering? I dunno.
A government agency putting up a christian cross, ignoring requests from citizens they serve for equal consideration. You think this is proper? 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.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 37 by AZPaul3, posted 07-28-2011 6:38 AM | | AZPaul3 has seen this message but not replied |
|
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member
|
Re: Attitude
I don't have a problem with religious symbols on government property by the government.
Of course not: you're religious and of the same religion in question. No, I'm not religious and there's nothing wrong with it.
which I don't support. Of course not: you're religious and your religion is one of the popular/accepted ones in the country. No, I'm not religious and it doesn't matter what religion it is.
Do you think other people of different/non religions feel the same way? Apparently not. But that's ok. I don't think anyone should care, really.
As long as christians get their way, everyone else should just shut up, right? Nope. Strike six. Get back under your bridge, troll.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 39 by hooah212002, posted 07-28-2011 10:27 AM | | hooah212002 has replied |
|
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member
|
Re: Attitude
You just can't help but call people names, can you? 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?
Oh? So you're an atheist now? Might want to change the name to "Atheist Scientist" then. No, I'm still a theist.
I don't think anyone should care, really. And that's your opinion..... 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.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 41 by hooah212002, posted 07-28-2011 10:36 AM | | hooah212002 has seen this message but not replied |
|
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member
|
I thought atheists were people without religion, yet this groups is obviously anti-religion. Or pro-First Amendment. I dunno... What do you think they mean by "total, absolute seperation of government and religion"? That seems to me to be outside the scope of the First Amendment. I've actually sent them a message through their website asking to clarify what they mean by that... I'll share what they respond with.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 45 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-28-2011 11:28 AM | | Dr Adequate has replied |
|
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 59 of 479 (626424)
07-29-2011 10:54 AM
|
Reply to: Message 47 by Modulous
07-28-2011 12:01 PM
|
|
That if a government funds or owns something, that something should be secular in its purpose and execution, without exception. Okay, I wouldn't call that "total, absolute seperation from religion". The AA hasn't responded so I don't know, but I could just be reading them as being more strict than they actually are. For the cross in question:
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 artefacts 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.
So the cross, itself, isn't really a problem then?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 47 by Modulous, posted 07-28-2011 12:01 PM | | Modulous has replied |
|
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member
|
not because of its religious value
became a symbol of spiritual comfort As a christian, is a star of david or a crescent moon "spiritually comforting" to you in any aspect? I fail to see any relevance to your question (other than to troll me)... spiritual comfort is not religion spiritual is not non-secular
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 60 by hooah212002, posted 07-29-2011 11:00 AM | | hooah212002 has replied |
|
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member
|
On the other hand, why refuse the atheists' offer to provide them with a non-religious memorial? It's not an unreasonable request. I haven't seen that they've refused it, but yeah, it isn't unreasonable.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 61 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-29-2011 11:32 AM | | Dr Adequate has not replied |
|
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 65 of 479 (626455)
07-29-2011 12:33 PM
|
Reply to: Message 62 by Modulous
07-29-2011 12:14 PM
|
|
There might be a secular purpose for displaying the cross, but it does also seem to be showing favour to a particular religious group, and about that religious group's focus of spiritual attention is of some kind of special importance to the WTC site. If they want to include a chunk of metal because it was important to the rescuers then it shouldn't matter why it was important to them. It shows favor to the rescuers, not to the religious group.
You have to admit, claiming that some religious people found religious significance in the cross after the disaster as a secular reason to have it at the museum is pushing things a little. Maybe a little, but not enough to get rid of it.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 62 by Modulous, posted 07-29-2011 12:14 PM | | Modulous has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 77 by Modulous, posted 07-29-2011 3:15 PM | | New Cat's Eye has replied |
|
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
A number of non-christians have spoken out that they do not find any comfort from this symbol. And that's irrelevant. So what? I don't like strawberry icecreme but I don't bitch about the parlor having it....
The only people who would find any significance from a cross are christians. Not necessarily.
Saying it is a spiritual symbol and not a religious one is ludicrous. In your opinion, but not in mine.
Does any other spiritual group of people find spiritual anything in the cross? I don't know, and it doesn't matter. The cross was important to the rescuers and that makes it worth having at the site.
I ask again: do you, as a self defined christian, find spiritual comfort in the star of david or crescent moon? A simple yes or no will suffice. Yes. Now explain how it is in any way relevant to the debate here?
That word...I don't think it means what you think it means..... You're not contributing to or furthering the debate. You're trying to "catch" people with questions that are not relevant to the debate. The only reason I can think of is to get a rise out of them. That's trolling 101.
|
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member
|
You didn't explain why your question, that I answered, was relevant to this debate. You were just trolling, weren't you?
If your religion was only as important to you as what flavor ice cream you like, why hold it so dear to you or at all? I am quite certain that a large number of other people are a bit more serious about their choice of deity and how they get their "spiritual comfort". What does that have to do with anything?
Perhaps you could name another group, then, that does find any spiritual anything in the cross? Why does it have to be a religious group? And aren't people free to find spiritual confort in anything they want? I'm not seeing how this is relevant.
On the contrary. Everyone but you sees the cross as an inherantly religious symbol. I do see it as inherantly religious, but realize that that is irrelevant because that's not the reason they are putting it there. It passes the Lemon Test, it doesn't matter that its a cross.
Using said symbol to memoralize anyone does an extreme disservice to those who do not follow that faith or "spirituality". How? And what makes it so extreme?
Yea, the christian ones. What about the other people? There could be non-christians who find spritual comfort in it. For people who don't, the cross should be irrelevant to them.
|
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 71 of 479 (626479)
07-29-2011 2:40 PM
|
Reply to: Message 70 by Straggler
07-29-2011 2:38 PM
|
|
Frankly - As an atheist I wouldn't give a flying testicle what symbol was put above my grave. However.... That's how I'd see it... But apparently the other guys thinks its an "extreme disservice" 
Why have they put a cross there rather than a swastika, a statue of Bugs Bunny or a Ying Yang symbol then? Because this specific piece of metal was important to the rescuers.
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 artefacts 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.
Edited by Catholic Scientist, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 70 by Straggler, posted 07-29-2011 2:38 PM | | Straggler has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 74 by Straggler, posted 07-29-2011 2:57 PM | | New Cat's Eye has replied |
|
™ Version 4.2
