Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,816 Year: 3,073/9,624 Month: 918/1,588 Week: 101/223 Day: 12/17 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Group of atheists has filed a lawsuit
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 121 of 479 (627515)
08-02-2011 5:00 PM
Reply to: Message 114 by Dr Adequate
08-02-2011 3:03 PM


Hence all this trouble.
Hence all this misplaced trouble. Its unwarranted (from a legal standpoint).
Yes, if they'd all adopted a cross as a symbol of mother's apple pie rather than Christianity this whole thing could have been avoided.
Should the reason for the historical significance even matter from a legal standpoint? It passes the Lemon Test so that's that, no?
You think my scheme wouldn't work? But why not? Surely enough religious veneration, by the right people, in the right place, makes a religious symbol secular ... or is it just this one?
No, you're right, but why would a venerated copy of the ten comandments be brought into the courtroom? Or do you mean museum? I think you're joke was just a little off...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-02-2011 3:03 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 132 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-02-2011 11:43 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 122 of 479 (627517)
08-02-2011 5:03 PM
Reply to: Message 115 by Nuggin
08-02-2011 3:04 PM


Re: excellent idea
It's no more important than any other chunk of metal from the site.
No, they disagree and that's why they're putting it into the museum. It has historical significance as being a piece of the actual building and also having significance to those participating in the rescue.
And, if it IS that there's something special about this piece of metal, then it shouldn't matter at all what orientation the display is mounted. It's still the same piece of metal if it's right side up, or upside down, or sidewise.
Sort of, but I doubt the rescuers see it that way.
If it's the METAL that's important, then who cares.
If it's the "Jesus!" that's important, then it carries religious implications which don't need to be there.
Its both, but that's not why its being included in the museum. Its in there for the historic value.
It has to be this specific piece, and it was significant to the rescuers because of the way it was displayed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by Nuggin, posted 08-02-2011 3:04 PM Nuggin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 124 by Nuggin, posted 08-02-2011 5:11 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 123 of 479 (627518)
08-02-2011 5:05 PM
Reply to: Message 116 by Theodoric
08-02-2011 3:05 PM


I said good day sir!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by Theodoric, posted 08-02-2011 3:05 PM Theodoric has not replied

  
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2492 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 124 of 479 (627522)
08-02-2011 5:11 PM
Reply to: Message 122 by New Cat's Eye
08-02-2011 5:03 PM


Re: excellent idea
No, they disagree and that's why they're putting it into the museum. It has historical significance as being a piece of the actual building and also having significance to those participating in the rescue.
Every piece of the actual building is a piece of the actual building.
So, the ONLY real significance here is that some of the people think that it's a cross.
AND, in fact, I would bet that those people wouldn't care if it was the ACTUAL piece of the building or just a set of crossbars that look like they were from the actual building.
It has to be this specific piece, and it was significant to the rescuers because of the way it was displayed.
But it wasn't displayed. It was just a piece of a building. It was like several million other pieces of the building.
THEY imbued it with meaning that it does not have in and of itself. The meaning that THEY imbued it with is religious.
THEY are saying "Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, etc who died at this place don't count because the letter T is important to Jesus".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by New Cat's Eye, posted 08-02-2011 5:03 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 125 by New Cat's Eye, posted 08-02-2011 5:19 PM Nuggin has replied
 Message 129 by Artemis Entreri, posted 08-02-2011 5:52 PM Nuggin has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 125 of 479 (627524)
08-02-2011 5:19 PM
Reply to: Message 124 by Nuggin
08-02-2011 5:11 PM


Re: excellent idea
Every piece of the actual building is a piece of the actual building.
Right, so they can't use a piece that wasn't as a piece that was.
So, the ONLY real significance here is that some of the people think that it's a cross.
And that that helped them during the rescue.
AND, in fact, I would bet that those people wouldn't care if it was the ACTUAL piece of the building or just a set of crossbars that look like they were from the actual building.
I doubt that.
You don't have any religious sentiment so you're not allowed to comment on it
But it wasn't displayed. It was just a piece of a building. It was like several million other pieces of the building.
Except that this specific piece actually helped in the resue efforts.
THEY imbued it with meaning that it does not have in and of itself. The meaning that THEY imbued it with is religious.
THEY are saying "Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, etc who died at this place don't count because the letter T is important to Jesus".
I didn't realize you were a part of that rescue operation and had direct insight into the significance it played for them. What else can you tell me about it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 124 by Nuggin, posted 08-02-2011 5:11 PM Nuggin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 126 by Nuggin, posted 08-02-2011 5:29 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2492 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 126 of 479 (627529)
08-02-2011 5:29 PM
Reply to: Message 125 by New Cat's Eye
08-02-2011 5:19 PM


Re: excellent idea
Right, so they can't use a piece that wasn't as a piece that was.
No one is suggesting that. If they need a display that was a piece of the building, there are plenty of chunks of concrete laying around. Use one of those.
And that that helped them during the rescue.
Was it pointing to a body or something? How exactly did it help them?
You don't have any religious sentiment so you're not allowed to comment on it
Oh crap, don't drag that over here too. I'll be catching crap from all the people who get to call themselves "victims" but I'm not allowed to call them "victims".
I didn't realize you were a part of that rescue operation and had direct insight into the significance it played for them. What else can you tell me about it?
I can tell you that the symbol of the cross is a symbol of hate and neglect for many religious of the world. Thousands of people died that day. A good many of them were Chinese. It's pretty safe to assume that at least some of those were not Christians.
The fact that SOME of the rescuers and SOME of the public seem to think that Jesus supported the attacks ignores the Buddhists who died who honestly wouldn't want to be buried under a cross whether it was one that was supposedly for or against terrorism.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 125 by New Cat's Eye, posted 08-02-2011 5:19 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 127 by New Cat's Eye, posted 08-02-2011 5:39 PM Nuggin has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 127 of 479 (627534)
08-02-2011 5:39 PM
Reply to: Message 126 by Nuggin
08-02-2011 5:29 PM


Re: excellent idea
If they need a display that was a piece of the building, there are plenty of chunks of concrete laying around. Use one of those.
They don't need a display that was a piece of the building. They have a piece of the building that held a significance for the resuers. Its not just any old cross, that it was a part of the actual building is part of the historical significance.
Was it pointing to a body or something? How exactly did it help them?
Spiritual comfort in a time of high stress. Increase morale. Some sort of effort consilience. I dunno, I wasn't there. I'm just taking their word for it.
Thousands of people died that day. A good many of them were Chinese. It's pretty safe to assume that at least some of those were not Christians.
I suppose that if a Chinese guy, or a non-Christian, brought something that should be included in the museum, then they would include that in the museum too.
The fact that SOME of the rescuers and SOME of the public seem to think that Jesus supported the attacks ignores the Buddhists who died who honestly wouldn't want to be buried under a cross whether it was one that was supposedly for or against terrorism.
Huh?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by Nuggin, posted 08-02-2011 5:29 PM Nuggin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 128 by Nuggin, posted 08-02-2011 5:49 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2492 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


(1)
Message 128 of 479 (627537)
08-02-2011 5:49 PM
Reply to: Message 127 by New Cat's Eye
08-02-2011 5:39 PM


Re: excellent idea
Huh?
Oh, come on. Surely this occurred to you.
If Jesus has the power to put a cross in a building as a symbol prior to the building being destroyed, it means that
1) Jesus KNEW the building was going to get destroyed
2) Jesus KNEW a bunch of people would die in the destruction
3) Jesus allowed it to happen without so much as a warning.
And now these "rescuers" want to brag about the destructive force of their God? Seems in bad taste to me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 127 by New Cat's Eye, posted 08-02-2011 5:39 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 135 by New Cat's Eye, posted 08-03-2011 10:22 AM Nuggin has replied

  
Artemis Entreri 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4228 days)
Posts: 1194
From: Northern Virginia
Joined: 07-08-2008


Message 129 of 479 (627538)
08-02-2011 5:52 PM
Reply to: Message 124 by Nuggin
08-02-2011 5:11 PM


Re: excellent idea
Nuggin writes:
But it wasn't displayed. It was just a piece of a building. It was like several million other pieces of the building.
False.
It was displayed, I even posted a picture of it displayed on the site from 2003. It was displayed from 2001-2006 at the site of the WTC towers.
wikipedia writes:
Following the attacks, a massive operation was launched to clear the site and attempt to find any survivors amongst the rubble. On September 13 one of the workers at the site, Frank Silecchia discovered a 20 feet (6.1 m)[5] cross of two steel beams amongst the debris of 6 World Trade Center...After a few weeks within the cleanup site the cross was an impediment to nearby work, so Silecchia and others working on the project received an expedited approval from the office of New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani to erect it on a pedestal on a portion of the former plaza on Church Street near Liberty. It was moved by crane on October 3 and installed on October 4[9][10].
ironically funny to me that it is on Church Street near Liberty.
some hate wikipedia so here is more
snopes writes:
On October 3, workers placed the cross atop a 40-foot foundation so that it could more easily be seen by everyone in the area, and it has since been blessed with holy water by a Franciscan priest and adopted by construction and rescue workers as "a symbol of hope, our symbol of faith, our symbol of healing.''
their source: McCaffrey, Shannon. "Iron 'Cross' Found at Ground Zero."
Associated Press. 8 October 2001.
New York Times writes:
The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey issued a legal memorandum yesterday that could help preserve some of the surviving remnants of the World Trade Center at the future site of the transportation hub at ground zero.
Preservationists, Sept. 11 survivors and relatives of victims have lobbied energetically to save as many remnants of the trade center as possible during future construction, given their historic value and their meaning to the families, since the remains of 42 percent of the victims have not been identified.
The document says that the Port Authority will preserve "to the maximum extent feasible" the bases of 84 columns from the north tower and 39 columns from the south tower, and install a glass wall that will afford views of column bases obscured by the construction of a proposed platform at the terminal.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/23/nyregion/23rebuild.html
It has been displayed since 2001. The reason the port authority wants to keep it on site is to preserve the artifacts from that event.
seems rather cut and dry to me.
Edited by Artemis Entreri, : wrong quoter

This message is a reply to:
 Message 124 by Nuggin, posted 08-02-2011 5:11 PM Nuggin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 130 by Nuggin, posted 08-02-2011 6:10 PM Artemis Entreri has replied

  
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2492 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 130 of 479 (627541)
08-02-2011 6:10 PM
Reply to: Message 129 by Artemis Entreri
08-02-2011 5:52 PM


Re: excellent idea
False.
It was displayed, I even posted a picture of it displayed on the site from 2003.
You are missing the context of the conversation.
The cross was "displayed" in the rubble. It was just an hunk of metal that someone said looked like something.
It wasn't put there by magic Jesus. It wasn't different than the thousands of other chunks of metal.
Yes, LATER, someone decided to make it a religious shrine at which point it was displayed thumbing it's nose at anyone of a different faith.
And, CERTAINLY, a portion of that was a middle finger toward the middle east.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 129 by Artemis Entreri, posted 08-02-2011 5:52 PM Artemis Entreri has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 131 by Artemis Entreri, posted 08-02-2011 6:21 PM Nuggin has not replied

  
Artemis Entreri 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4228 days)
Posts: 1194
From: Northern Virginia
Joined: 07-08-2008


Message 131 of 479 (627543)
08-02-2011 6:21 PM
Reply to: Message 130 by Nuggin
08-02-2011 6:10 PM


Re: excellent idea
You are missing the context of the conversation.
The cross was "displayed" in the rubble. It was just an hunk of metal that someone said looked like something.
It wasn't put there by magic Jesus. It wasn't different than the thousands of other chunks of metal.
ok, my bad.
Yes, LATER, someone decided to make it a religious shrine at which point it was displayed thumbing it's nose at anyone of a different faith.
that is not the reason at all. but you can have that opinion.
And, CERTAINLY, a portion of that was a middle finger toward the middle east.
I am not even sure it pointed towards South West Asia.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by Nuggin, posted 08-02-2011 6:10 PM Nuggin has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 132 of 479 (627601)
08-02-2011 11:43 PM
Reply to: Message 121 by New Cat's Eye
08-02-2011 5:00 PM


Hence all this misplaced trouble. Its unwarranted (from a legal standpoint).
I'll wait for the judge.
It passes the Lemon Test so that's that, no?
Well, does it?
Should the reason for the historical significance even matter from a legal standpoint?
Quite possibly.
No, you're right, but why would a venerated copy of the ten comandments be brought into the courtroom?
For the historical value it gained by being venerated. You wouldn't object if they displayed the Bill of Rights because of its historical associations, would you? So apparently if the Ten Commandments was venerated enough, it, like the cross, would become secular and historical, at which point you could put the Bill of Rights in a broom closet and replace it with the secular ol' Ten Commandments.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by New Cat's Eye, posted 08-02-2011 5:00 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 134 by New Cat's Eye, posted 08-03-2011 10:16 AM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 133 of 479 (627603)
08-03-2011 12:21 AM
Reply to: Message 117 by Artemis Entreri
08-02-2011 4:06 PM


We put most of our cultural historical artifacts in museums, not courthouses.
This is indeed usually the case, but for some reason James Madison forgot to stipulate as much in the Bill of Rights, so it is possible to erect purely secular displays in the courtroom. And, as we have now learned, an object can become purely secular as a direct result of being the object of religious veneration. So I don't see why it wouldn't work.
The only question remaining is how much religious veneration makes a thing secular. Does it actually need to be blessed by a priest, or can laymen make it secular if they're sufficiently devout?
You do it all the time it’s who you are, it’s how you post.
All the time? What a shame, then, that the one time you decided to call me on it, I wasn't. Jolly bad luck, old bean.
Sry that linked is blocked.
Some quotes, then:
Of all of the miracles that occurred at Ground Zero, one of the most inspiring was that of the Ground Zero Crosses. [...] One of the crosses was later moved out to the middle of Ground Zero for the world to see, and stood as a source of faith, hope, and comfort during the work at Ground Zero. It was a miracle. Below are some pictures of the miracle
Until we get a ruling that we don’t like and then we have to legislate this piece of history in. There are more of us than you.
Let us know when there are enough of you to amend the Constitution.
Yes a frivolous one.
Clearly the case is not completely without merit. Public displays of religious symbols have been successfully challenged in the past. The question is whether this particular religious symbol is immune for some reason.
Interestingly that you have to swear to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth SO HELP ME GOD, on a bible in that same court.
No you don't, what on Earth gave you that idea?
You can swear on the Bible. Or the Koran. Or the Guru Granth Sahib ... etc. Or you can affirm. It's a matter of individual choice, like the symbols on soldiers' headstones, and as such does not entangle Church and State.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by Artemis Entreri, posted 08-02-2011 4:06 PM Artemis Entreri has seen this message but not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 134 of 479 (627667)
08-03-2011 10:16 AM
Reply to: Message 132 by Dr Adequate
08-02-2011 11:43 PM


I'll wait for the judge.
Wuss.
What's your opinion?
Well, does it?
I think it does. I've already explained why.
No, you're right, but why would a venerated copy of the ten comandments be brought into the courtroom?
For the historical value it gained by being venerated.
I meant, why a courtroom...
But I guess that is beside the point.
You wouldn't object if they displayed the Bill of Rights because of its historical associations, would you? So apparently if the Ten Commandments was venerated enough, it, like the cross, would become secular and historical, at which point you could put the Bill of Rights in a broom closet and replace it with the secular ol' Ten Commandments.
That's almost right. You're referring to "The Ten Commandments" as a general thing, but we need to be talking about a specific item. Some historically important artifact that is in the image of the Ten Commandments could be secular. Just because its the Ten Commandments doesn't automatically make it non-secular. There's plenty of religious paintings in government museums.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-02-2011 11:43 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 137 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-03-2011 11:28 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 135 of 479 (627668)
08-03-2011 10:22 AM
Reply to: Message 128 by Nuggin
08-02-2011 5:49 PM


Re: excellent idea
So you've accepted that it helped people and have no argument against why it, legally, can be included in the museum.
We're now left with:
Seems in bad taste to me.
That's fine, but we don't legislate by tastes.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by Nuggin, posted 08-02-2011 5:49 PM Nuggin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 136 by Nuggin, posted 08-03-2011 11:23 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024