Popeman38 Posted August 4, 2012 Share Posted August 4, 2012 WTF is wrong with this group. They literally file lawsuits across the country to remove any trace of religion from the public space. Any cross on a city monument? Or on a city crest? Expect a lawsuit. The name of their organization indicates they don't understand the 1st Amendment. And I thought atheists were supposed to be above this sorta stuff? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 I doubt atheists generally give a **** one way or another... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeluCopter29 Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 Well actually because of the 1st amendment you would think they could sue on the basis of having religious symbols on public buildings (IE schools and community centers). Of course, I always have a problem with these types of groups. I doubt any of their members are actually active users of the places they sue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IONTOP Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 WTF is wrong with this group. They literally file lawsuits across the country to remove any trace of religion from the public space. Any cross on a city monument? Or on a city crest? Expect a lawsuit. The name of their organization indicates they don't understand the 1st Amendment. And I thought atheists were supposed to be above this sorta stuff? Westboro Baptist Church? What's wrong with this group? They literally protest across the country to say that people are going to hell. Any death of a soldier? Or a famous person? Expect a protest. And I thought Christians were supposed to be above this sorta stuff? YaSeeWhatIDidThere? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeluCopter29 Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 Westboro Baptist Church? What's wrong with this group? They literally protest across the country to say that people are going to hell. Any death of a soldier? Or a famous person? Expect a protest. And I thought Christians were supposed to be above this sorta stuff?YaSeeWhatIDidThere? Death of gay soldiers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 WTF is wrong with this group. They literally file lawsuits across the country to remove any trace of religion from the public space. Any cross on a city monument? Or on a city crest? Expect a lawsuit. The name of their organization indicates they don't understand the 1st Amendment. And I thought atheists were supposed to be above this sorta stuff? Actually, your post indicated that you don't understand the 1st Amendment. Yes, the 1st Amendment prohibits the government from endorsing any religion. ---------- Now, am I going to go donate money to these folks? March in support of their cause? Click on their stupid web page? Nope. I got more important things to think about. In fact, do I wish they'd go away? Yep. But they are, technically, in a nitpicking way, right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 Westboro Baptist Church? What's wrong with this group? They literally protest across the country to say that people are going to hell. Any death of a soldier? Or a famous person? Expect a protest. And I thought Christians were supposed to be above this sorta stuff?YaSeeWhatIDidThere? it is an interesting point. i've wondered how many atheists are of the organized, militant type and how many are of the 'man, those people of wacky, pass the butter' type. personally if i were an atheist, i dont think i would give 2 craps about what someone who believes in god thinks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 it is an interesting point. i've wondered how many atheists are of the organized, militant type and how many are of the 'man, those people of wacky, pass the butter' type. I would assume that it's the same proportions as in any other group. (Although, I will admit that there are some groups that really do tend to attract a disproportionate percentage of whackos. Like conspiracy theories. Birthers. The Republican Party.) (Internet message boards.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popeman38 Posted August 5, 2012 Author Share Posted August 5, 2012 Actually, your post indicated that you don't understand the 1st Amendment. Yes, the 1st Amendment prohibits the government from endorsing any religion. ---------- Now, am I going to go donate money to these folks? March in support of their cause? Click on their stupid web page? Nope. I got more important things to think about. In fact, do I wish they'd go away? Yep. But they are, technically, in a nitpicking way, right. Larry, believe it or not crosses have been used on memorials for centuries. Having a cross on a memorial to the dead is not a violation. Additionally, please explain to me where in the 1st the phrase "freedom from religion" exists. Freedom of religion is good. Separation of church and state is good. Eradication of any symbol that in any manner could be interpreted to resemble a religious symbol is bad. There are crosses at Arlington National Cemetary. Should we remove those? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostofSparta Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 1st: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;" 14th: "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." So, as Larry said, these guys are technically (and therefore, legally) correct. Neither the Federal (per the 1st) not state/local (per the 14th) governments should be endorsing Christianity as the official religion of the US. And this can include such things as picking explicitly Christian symbols (such as a cross) for memorials and other government projects/sites. That said, yes, they are over the top and abrasive, and often seem proud of this. Like Westboro Baptist, or the more militant members of PETA, or any fringe group that puts all their energy into 1 pet cause, these guys seem to thrive on bad publicity to advance their pet cause. They'd likely win more converts if they toned down the rhetoric/behavior, but in the end that's not really their point anyway, so they don't care. They just want attention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popeman38 Posted August 5, 2012 Author Share Posted August 5, 2012 1st: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;"14th: "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." So, as Larry said, these guys are technically (and therefore, legally) correct. Neither the Federal (per the 1st) not state/local (per the 14th) governments should be endorsing Christianity as the official religion of the US. And this can include such things as picking explicitly Christian symbols (such as a cross) for memorials and other government projects/sites. That said, yes, they are over the top and abrasive, and often seem proud of this. Like Westboro Baptist, or the more militant members of PETA, or any fringe group that puts all their energy into 1 pet cause, these guys seem to thrive on bad publicity to advance their pet cause. They'd likely win more converts if they toned down the rhetoric/behavior, but in the end that's not really their point anyway, so they don't care. They just want attention. I know what the 1st says. Having a memorial is not a law, and it does not prohibit people from exercising religion. A memorial or a photo, or a star of David, or a menorah, or the ten commandments are not laws. When did the interpretation of the 1st swing from endorsement of religion to prohibition of any religious symbols? New Mexico as the "Cross of Burgundy" on it. Is that religious persecution? The seal of Florida says "In God We Trust". Arlington National Cemetary has the Star of David, crosses, and the crescent moon on head stones. Are these religious persecution? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The 12th Commandment Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 <-----They haven't sued us here yet but we do have a local guy with nothing better to do than constantly complain about it in the paper. Our name comes from Apaches making a wagon train full of them on a local hillside for which the area became known. Maybe if it's historically based they don't have so much trouble with it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 1st: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;"14th: "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." So, as Larry said, these guys are technically (and therefore, legally) correct. Neither the Federal (per the 1st) not state/local (per the 14th) governments should be endorsing Christianity as the official religion of the US. And this can include such things as picking explicitly Christian symbols (such as a cross) for memorials and other government projects/sites. That said, yes, they are over the top and abrasive, and often seem proud of this. Like Westboro Baptist, or the more militant members of PETA, or any fringe group that puts all their energy into 1 pet cause, these guys seem to thrive on bad publicity to advance their pet cause. They'd likely win more converts if they toned down the rhetoric/behavior, but in the end that's not really their point anyway, so they don't care. They just want attention. What you quoted clearly talks about the government and the laws they inact. It says zero about "endorsing". A cross on a local government seal is not the government "making or enforcing a law" or "establishing a religion". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 Larry, believe it or not crosses have been used on memorials for centuries. Having a cross on a memorial to the dead is not a violation. And what that has to do with the US government endorsing a religion is . . . . And I agree. If I put a cross on my tombstone, it's none of your business. If THE GOVERNMENT puts a cross on my tombstone, or over the cemetery, or on its official documents, THAT'S when it's a violation. Additionally, please explain to me where in the 1st the phrase "freedom from religion" exists. Oops. You caught me. I guess I'll have to retract the part of my post where I SAID that those exact words were in there. But gee, I can't seem to find that part of my post. All I can find is the part where I said that he government us prohibited from endorsing a religion. And it is. Freedom of religion is good. Separation of church and state is good. Eradication of any symbol that in any manner could be interpreted to resemble a religious symbol is bad. There are crosses at Arlington National Cemetary. Should we remove those? What you haven't mentioned is "government endorsement of a religion is . . . .?" I don't know about Arlington. I assume that the people who are buried there (or their families, on their behalf), chose a religious symbol. If that's the case, then the government isn't putting crosses there, the guy in the grave did. ---------- Post added August-4th-2012 at 09:54 PM ---------- What you quoted clearly talks about the government and the laws they inact. It says zero about "endorsing". A cross on a local government seal is not the government "making or enforcing a law" or "establishing a religion". Everything the government does is a law. And it is the government establishing an OFFICIAL religion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 Everything the government does is a law. And it is the government establishing an OFFICIAL religion. Really, Larry? lol...you're gonna have to do better than that. I understand the need by some to streeeettttcchhhhh the definition of "law" and "establish" in order to make some unnecessary philosophical point...but tying up the courts and the people's money fighting stupid court cases over that philosophy is asinine. There's a difference between "acknowledging" and "establishing". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitman21ST Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 Everything the government does is a law. And it is the government establishing an OFFICIAL religion. Wait, what? If "everything the government did" is a law and it is the government establishing an official religion, then why aren't every non-Christians in jail? After all, they're breaking the "law" that is the cross on a government seal... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 Really, Larry? lol...you're gonna have to do better than that.I understand the need by some to streeeettttcchhhhh the definition of "law" and "establish" in order to make some unnecessary philosophical point...but tying up the courts and the people's money fighting stupid court cases over that philosophy is asinine. There's a difference between "acknowledging" and "establishing". And there's a difference between "acknowledging" and "endorsing" or "promoting". And I'm not stretching a single thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitman21ST Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 And there's a difference between "acknowledging" and "endorsing" or "promoting". And I'm not stretching a single thing. And having a cross on a government seal isn't endorsing or promoting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 And having a cross on a government seal isn't endorsing or promoting. Yes, it absolutely is. Very few things are important enough to be given space on the seal of a government. There's not a lot of room on there. When the government decides that we're going to dedicate part of that space to an advertisement for one particular religion, gen yes, they absolutly are endorsing that religion. Despite the attempts of a lot of people, now days, who are willing to lie, to promote their religion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 And there's a difference between "acknowledging" and "endorsing" or "promoting". And I'm not stretching a single thing. Ok, so what's the law that was established when a county government puts a cross among the many images on its government seal to acknowledge the role that spanish missions played in the early settling of the area? And what is the penalty of breaking that law? I'm all ears. ---------- Post added August-4th-2012 at 07:51 PM ---------- Yes, it absolutely is. Very few things are important enough to be given space on the seal of a government. There's not a lot of room on there. When the government decides that we're going to dedicate part of that space to an advertisement for one particular religion, gen yes, they absolutly are endorsing that religion. Despite the attempts of a lot of people, now days, who are willing to lie, to promote their religion. This is the sign of a very narrow mind. The cross can stand for a multitude of things...not just a religion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 We've gone from seeking to stop an official religion and a specific church entangled with government... To pretending a cross is a representation of a specific religion and that the only way to stay free is to chase every sign of religion from public space. But remember, this isn't actually happening. It's all imaginary and the only religious battle in the US is Christianity beating everyone else over the head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Excuses Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 One day would like to see a crescent and star on one of our government buildings only to observe the massive butthurt it's going to cause all around the country. We're picky with the symbols we like to display. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 The cross can stand for a multitude of things...not just a religion. Right. They put it on there in honor of euclidean geometry. Or, I know. It symbolizes a crosshair in a rifle's sights. In honor of the Second Amendment. I believe I have previously expressed my opinions of the people who are willing to lie, so that they can get the government to endorse their religion? ---------- Post added August-4th-2012 at 11:22 PM ---------- We've gone from seeking to stop an official religion and a specific church entangled with government... To pretending a cross is a representation of a specific religion and that the only way to stay free is to chase every sign of religion from public space.But remember, this isn't actually happening. It's all imaginary and the only religious battle in the US is Christianity beating everyone else over the head. 1). The cross is the symbol of one religion. 2). And the cross is in the public space, because people want to beat everybody over the head with Christianity. In violation of the Constitution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 Right. They put it on there in honor of euclidean geometry. Or, I know. It symbolizes a crosshair in a rifle's sights. In honor of the Second Amendment. I believe I have previously expressed my opinions of the people who are willing to lie, so that they can get the government to endorse their religion? And I believe I have previously expressed my opinions on how incredibly narrow-minded your views on this thread have been lol...Oh, and I believe I have previously asked you what law was created when a government puts a cross among the numerous images on its government seal...and what the penalty for breaking that law would be. Did you answer that, because I must have missed it. 1). The cross is the symbol of one religion. For the record, a crucifix represents Christianity and that alone, not a cross. A cross represents far more than you apparently are aware of. If any of those crosses show a tiny Jesus Christ on it, you'll start to have a point. ---------- Post added August-4th-2012 at 08:44 PM ---------- One day would like to see a crescent and star on one of our government buildings only to observe the massive butthurt it's going to cause all around the country.We're picky with the symbols we like to display. Shouldn't we be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Excuses Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 Shouldn't we be? Sure. No disagreement. A crescent and star seems pretty inoffensive. Let's put that on a public building, preferably in the Bible Belt, and then see how people react. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.