Group of atheists has filed a lawsuit

The bullshit is yours. The museum chose a symbol of hope. The people who had the hope happened to be Christians. Only a handful of atheists seem to see that as a constitutional problem.

There'll be a few million people view that symbol in the next year, would you bet me anything at all that if you interviewed them and asked them what does the symbol represent that more would say hope than religion or Christianity or some such?And for those three people who say 'hope' how many do you think would answer the follow up question 'why?' With something about salvation? Really, was there a poll?But like I said, I'd vote for it, I just wouldn't pretend that it's not a crucifix and holds no religious significance.

They told the world their reasons for including the cross.If you want to continue to believe there are secret reasons they aren't telling everyone, reasons even the courts failed to find, reasons that even other atheists and non-Christians on this board have concluded do not exist; then that is your own delusional indulgence.The rest of us will enjoy our reality.

Plenty of historical artifacts also hold religious significance.Ultimately, though, their inclusion among lists of historical artifacts is not their religious meaning but their historical importance.I suppose half the country could begin venerating the White House as a holy religious shrine; but that would not obligate the government to dissolve its interest in maintaining the building, which it doesat public expenseon political, historical, and practical grounds.Whatever the personal reasons for recognizing the cross as important, it still has historical significance that justifies its inclusion into the museum regardless of what anyone thinksincluding the museum's employees.

The reality is an enormous, physical, tangible, photographical crucifix that the entire world can see, probably the most recognisable brand on the planet - the rest is rationalised hokum designed to get around an inconvenient law.

nvmEdited by hooah212002, : No reason given.

And....? Why does this bother you?

It doesn't bother me at all - like I say, I like the imagery - but the hypocrisy of the argument is very interesting to observe.

Ok I get your point. Perhaps the Christians rationalize the argument by claiming that any item---even a religious one---can have cultural significance and that in their mind, they simply see Christianity as a cultural influence in their pasts...they see no need for separation of church and state in matters of cultural significance. You point out that the article in question is plainly religious and that society is in denial of how religion influences current culture. Right?

This is US culture specifically. No other state would agonise in this way about such an object - it's obviously iconic and it would have been picked up by any Christian based society as a powerful image. (Just to test the argument, ask yourself if that crucifix would have been used by a Muslim country.)The problem the lawyers are having is that they want to use the icon regardless of their laws because it is so obviously an amazing thing - but have to torture logic simply because it's of deeply religious significance. It's not a conflict culture, it's purely a conflict of law.

Whoa, hang on. Clarify this for me, what exactly are you saying here?Are you saying that the museum officials are lying? That they are trying to skirt the Constitution and include a purely religious artifact into a secular museum and are committing perjury to the courts in order to save face? Well no, the Constitution is clear on this matter - there's no problem including this cross in a secular museum. And its not making anyone do anything. The American Atheists are the ones who are making everyone torture words and feelings. False. There is a point in calling it something else: it IS something else too.Nobody doubts its religious significance. Its just that more significance can be piled onto the religious significance. If fact, even secular significance can be piled on.Once there's enough secular significance, then there is no problem with including it in a secular museum.You do realize that there are plenty of religious artifacts in secular museums here in the U.S., right?From Message 460: Not at all. The law is clear: Including this cross does not violate the constitution because the officials have an honest secular interest in including it with no evidence of any overt religious motivation.There's no conflict whatsoever.The problem all lies with the American Atheists. They're the ones with an unconstitutional position (the complete separation of religion from government). They, and their supporters, are the ones who have to torture logic to create this conflict. I mean, you've gone so far as to offer a conspiracy theory.And look at the other crap they are making up now:

quote:

---

American Atheists President David Silverman used a return appearance on television’s most-watched cable news network to suggest that at least five members of his group have suffered a variety of ailments — chiefly dyspepsia — because their intestines can’t stomach the thought of a Christian symbol on display at the National September 11 Memorial and Museum in New York. Apparently, the stomach pains would go away, though, if the museum installed a plaque honoring all the atheists murdered in

---

Okay: Rich Sheirer.

quote:

---

Men cut replicas of the cross out of ruined steel and carried them in their pockets. Even Rich Sheirer, then New York’s director of the Office of Emergency Management and a self-described short, round Jewish guy, appreciated the cross. Intellectually, you knew it’s just two pieces of steel, but you saw the impact it had on so many people, and you also knew it was more than steel, he says. Sheirer has a picture of it standing in the wreckage, as well as a small steel cutout given to him for a keepsake by the September 11th Families’ Association.

​

Father Brian says: We had Jews, Muslims, Buddhists. People who believed or didn’t believe. It was a matter of human solidarity. Whether you believed was irrelevant. We needed some type of fellowship down there, other than working.

---

I'd be willing to bet that a large number would associate it with something other than religion. If they were paying attention to why it was included in the memorial, they'd say it was hope that more victims would be rescued. Salvation from the wreckage, yes. "Eternal salvation" not necessarily. It's funny how you self-styled experts on religious symbols don't know the difference between a cross and a crucifix.The fundies that I know make a huge distinction. A crucifix would have no more religious significance to them than a portrait of Satan.In the broad sense, a cross may be a religious symbol but it means different things to different denominations.

It doesn't matter what the reasoning anyone gives or believes is. The fact that the item has a valid historical reason for being included in the museum is all that matters.Rationalized hokum is still rational.

It's an alibi, I'll give you all that.