Group of atheists has filed a lawsuit

Nice job of insulting two people in ten words or less...I could be wrong but were you not busting Theo's balls about breaking forum rules? Just saying....Now back to the topic please.

The Smithsonian removed an offensive depiction of the cross...it offended catholics.

quote:

---

William Donohue, a voice of reliable outrage at any perceived insult to Catholics is unhappy, still, with the Smithsonian's stance on art censorship.

​

This Donohue's views on a video about AIDS and death -- one that included four seconds of ants crawling on a crucifix, the image of Jesus' sacrificial death -- prompted the Smithsonian managers to yank the video out of a major, privately funded, exhibition of portraits of the gay experience.

​

But it seems that the Board of Regents meeting, which applauded the management of the nation's museum complex, didn't go far enough for the founder of the Catholic League.

​

First, there was no explicit apology to Christians.

​

Second, the Smithsonian officials dared to still speak of the video, A Fire in My Belly by David Wojnarowicz, as a significant work of art.

​

According to the Associated Press, John McCarter said the artist, who died from AIDS at age 37, had artistic purpose in mind:

​

"Representation of the crucifix and the ants had an interpretation to it, I believe in his mind that was not sacrilegious," McCarter said, noting that the artist was working at the time in Mexico where Christian iconography is often represented in art. "Alternatively, it might have been very deeply religious."

​

Donohue's Catholic League press release finds that concept totally bizarre.

​

But the worst offense, to Donohue's views, is that new guidelines established to avoid future controversies don't build in religious censorship. Instead, they say, ""Culturally sensitive exhibitions should be previewed from a diverse set of perspectives."

​

Oops. More than one view needs to be considered before excluding a work of art from an exhibit in a taxpayer-supported museum?

​

No no no, says Donohue. He doesn't want religious voices consulted, he wants them to have the final say.

...( extra quote box added for purpose of highlighting this statement....FnL)

​

Now imagine if there is a video of large ants running all over a depiction of Muhammad, is it incumbent on Smithsonian officials to find someone who likes such fare? Would it change things if we substituted the crucified Jesus for Muhammad?

​

However, Donohue also fears the opposite -- that the new guidelines are a censorship "smokescreen" to give museum curators cover for possibly censoring religious works -- presumably meaning art he likes -- out of shows. Donohue tells Religion News Service:

​

They are giving themselves wiggle room. They are leaving the door open to censor that kind of art they find offensive.

​

Should religion be the trump card in deciding what is art and which art is worthy of display in our public galleries? Whose religion? Should the Smithsonian Board of Regents include a priest, a rabbi, a pastor and an imam?

---

Not exactly the same situation, but it seems somewhat relevant as to the disparity involving what is an acceptable use of a christian or any religious symbol. If the cross is shown in bad taste then Christians want it removed. Maybe they should realize the cross itself is offensive to others, therefore has no place in a public place regardless of whether it is shown in a positive or negative way. I am not sure I fully agree with the Smithsonian because it was a work of art...it seems they were trying to keep everyone happy...which might be the best way to handle it being it isn't a private museum. sourceEdited by fearandloathing, : No reason given.

I intended for Message 280 to be a response to you, just want to know how you feel about this....
sourceI am a moron and hit general reply.Is it ok to remove an offensive depiction of the cross?

As I said... I am not sure I agree with the Smithsonian. I understand making compromises in order to keep the peace, this is all the AA asked for, removal or a compromise that wouldn't exclude anyone. Seems reasonable to me, though I tend to lean more towards the thought that the Smithsonian made a poor choice in order to keep the peace... Politics I am sure.

I guess, in all honesty, that I don't want to see the WTC cross becoming the focus of the memorial. I would find that offensive, it wasn't a Christian tragedy...it was a tragedy for all of mankind.

WTF does this have to do with the topic??????Out of all your post in this thread does any of them deal with the topic???I am at a loss for finding anything relevant about anything you have said so far.

I had seen it before, but had no idea that it was going back to the memorial til the AA filed a lawsuit. I knew when I posted this topic it would be an interesting read for some of us, many different points of view on this forum.

quote:

---

The trouble with the cross is that it refuses to be the universal symbol of beauty that some would make it out to beit speaks life to those who believe, but death to those who do not.

​

No wonder people disagree about where it should be displayed.

​

Ryan Holladay is pastor of Lower Manhattan Community Church, which meets two blocks from the World Trade Center site.

---

I don't know how common this point of view is with your average Christian, but I think he makes a valid point. The whole article is good, this is from the very end of page 2. Read more...I have been looking for some pictures of its location at the memorial to try and put it in context as to how prominent it is....I don't know if it center stage or what. I don't watch or follow many court cases but I hope this one is shown somewhere. I am interested in how the AA argue it. Yea...sadly I am sure many in the Islamic world celebrated.

I managed to find this image, I think it may be a depiction of how it may be displayed. I don't think this an actual photo of the display, I could be wrong? see more hereSome good stuff about the memorial at here.Nothing on the cross specifically I noticed though.

Its last location before being moved back to the WTC memorial was a church....think it was the one across the street maybe?? Go figure...

Why don't you start a topic on this instead of continuing to post off-topic. What does animal rights have to do with the AA lawsuit or the placement of the WTC cross? Don't blame it on answering other Off_Topic post....your a big boy and should know when you are wandering away from the topic.

At least you got this going for you... Atheist could care less about some BS biblical rant about where you think our laws come from. The only laws that matter in this case is the laws of the USA regardless of what you think.

I haven't asked anyone directly but have also wondered why this one... But not this one... I am sure there were other "cross" examples were present, a Google image search was all it took to find these 2. They are clearly 2 different examples of a cross sticking up out of the rubble. I wonder why one was chosen as a source of comfort, but the other wasn't. Multiple crosses would makes it seems much less miraculous so one got ignored?

Care to share? I would like to see the lyrics, maybe you could offer it to the WTC memorial. If you are so inclined then it might lend itself to a poem?I wonder if the memorial has any mention or artifacts from the pentagon ect... Seems like there should be, the WTC was not the only place that was attacked that day.Maybe this thought is off topic a bit... I would rather see the memorial as a 911 memorial, one that also remembered the pentagon, and those who died in a field because they fought back.

Excellent, I wish I was more artistically inclined. Thanks for sharing that, very moving. I think it would make an excellent addition to the memorial.There are events I will never forget where I was when they took place. I was running late for work on 911 and heard about the first tower being hit, I thought it was some kind of joke/skit because I was listening to the John boy and Billy show. John boys tone of voice after a second or so made me stop at a friends house and wake his wife up, we were watching the first tower burn and wondering how this accident could happen? When the second plane hit I knew something bad was going down. The images of people jumping will haunt me forever.

quote:

---

Nearly 350,000 tons of World Trade Center steel have travelled throughout the country to be reused in small and large scale tributes remembering the events of September 11th

---

It seems most got sold off as scrap. Read more

quote:

---

After September 11th, most of the World Trade Center steel was trucked off to New Jersey salvage yards where it was broken down and sent all over the world for reuse. However, over 1,000 pieces of debris were placed in a JFK airport hangar for the Port Authority to oversee. Recently, the PA announced a program to distribute the steel to anyone who requested it for a 9/11 memorial site. The requirements were the memorial be public and free of admission charge, and the interested party would handle its own steel transportation. With nearly 2,000 applicants, the program has assisted in erecting 225 September 11th memorials throughout the country.

---

You can still get some, although I don't know if ultimately there will be enough to go around, after 10 years it seems like demand would be going down?