Group of atheists has filed a lawsuit

I'm afraid I don't know enough about the history of St. Peter's and at this point I am not ready to spend time researching this one.Did the Cathedral play some significant role in the nation's history, other than some president praying there? What would have put it on the national stage and in the nation's mind that it should be designated a National Landmark? I don't know. You do not have to. The society in the USA has had and still has a religious component. We are trying to ween society off the religious nipple but you do not do that by being blind and revisionist to the nation's history. In history the facts are the only thing that matter. This nation has, in part, a religious past and no revisionist slight of hand is going to change that fact.If the facts of history show that some structure had a major impact on the nation and our national character, even in a religious way, then the question becomes whether or not we chose to preserve that structure. It should not matter whether something had a religious role or not. If it was significant enough to the nation's history, whether that be our secular history or our religious history, then we can debate whether or not we as a nation want to buy the thing and keep it.What is "significant enough"? Depends on a case by case basis. Ahh, debate. Gets your blood pressure up. Good for what ails ya. That is how we decide.

AZPaul3 continues to avoid the question:

quote:

---

This supposition is not supported by the evidence presented.

---

Then what other significance does this item have?

quote:

---

Apparently the curators have acknowledged the historical (Yahtzee) significance of the cross, which you keep saying does not exist

---

Then surely you can tell us what it is.What other significance does this item have?

quote:

---

If you have any additional questions I suggest you contact the museum.

---

(*chuckle*)Why do you think there's a lawsuit?What other significance does this item have?

This supposition is not supported by the evidence presented. Answered in Message 177 and again in Message 182 and then yet again in Message 193. Answered in Message 177 and again in Message 182 and then yet again in Message 193. Answered in Message 177 and again in Message 182 and then yet again in Message 193.

AZPaul3 continues to avoid the question:

quote:

---

This supposition is not supported by the evidence presented.

---

Then what other significance does this item have?I know, I know...you'll just refer to previous posts. But since I maintain those don't actually show any evidence, perhaps you will be so kind as to rephrase what you said before.

quote:

---

Answered in Message 177

---

Refuted in Message 181.

quote:

---

and again in Message 182

---

And refuted again in Message 183.

quote:

---

and then yet again in Message 193.

---

And then refuted yet again in Message 195.You need to come up with something new.What other significance does this item have?Edited by Rrhain, : Added refutation references.

This supposition is not supported by the evidence presented. Answered in Message 177 and again in Message 182 and then yet again in Message 193. What you "maintain" is of no importance to me and requires no further explanation from me. No. I need do no such thing. Answered in Message 177 and again in Message 182 and then yet again in Message 193.Get the picture here, Rrhain?

If you wouldn't mind, it's extremely annoying to have people arguing about whether or not they asked or answered a question in a previous message.It's even MORE annoying to have people arguing about whether or not they asked or answered the question that was being questioned in the previous message about what was being said in previous messages.Is the rest of this thread going to be an infinite number of posts of:"Did not!"
"Did so!"
"Did not not"
"Did so so"
"Did not not not"
"Did so so so"If you believe you answered a question but someone believes you didn't, then you didn't do a good enough job answering it.If you believe you did do a good enough job, then repost your answer in a snarky way that makes it clear you think the person is a moron for not being about to understand it.Linking back to old messages and the old messages that refute them and the old messages that refute the refutations and the old messages that question the logic in the replies to refuted refutations requires so many pop up windows and additional tabs that just following the denials risks crashing most browsers.The facts remain the same, as they have for PAGES now.There is NO other purpose or importance to this letter T than the fact that it looks like a Christian symbol. It's not the only one. It's presence is not even improbably. I suspect these can be found in virtually every demolished building which had iron crossbeams.This object is no more relevant to the history of 9/11 than the photo of "satan" in the smoke from the towers.It's something that looks like something that _some_ religious people think is important.Meanwhile, other religious people see it as a symbol of a religious blood feud which was responsible for the death and destruction that day.Until a Christians can provide the following -
1) Evidence that this object has ANY significance beyond looking like a letter T
2) An explanation why they would WANT to imply that their deity had anything to do with 9/11
- there's not much left to discuss.You guys have been utterly stomped on this thread. It's time to put up or shut up.

F&L asks: It's not one of my best, and the last verse would I leave off because it's kind of sappy (music missing here):Another Human Hero
copyright 2001 Nathan A.Smitha shell of framework in the dust
reaches upward in one last thrust
in one last anguished cry
to cling on to the sky.
and down in the smoke below the blue,
working slowly, searching through
the wreckage, as he fights off sleep,
seeking heroes beneath his feet,
you can see another hero...
you can see another hero...
you can see another hero
...at Ground Zero.but he sees no one in the dust.
he sees no one & yet he must
keep on with all his might,
through the day & through the night,
until another takes his place
& he can finally wipe his face
& lie down & get some sleep -
then he's right back up on his feet.
he's another human hero...
he's another human hero...
he's another human hero
...at Ground Zero.there's not a single sound in the dust.
even the air itself is crushed.
it burns into her eyes.
it chokes her throat when she cries,
but she never plans to stop.
she pushes on until she drops
into another shift of sleep -
then she's right back up on her feet.
she's another human hero...
she's another human hero...
she's another human hero
...at Ground Zero.the framework standing in the dust
cuts down our spirit, dims our trust
in this world that would be free,
made for you & you & you & me -
a world these madmen cannot win.
our dreams are shining from within
and now we're rising from our sleep
we're standing tall, on our feet
for every human hero...
for all the world's heroes...
at all the world's Ground Zeroes...
we're standing tall for the heroes...
and we salute all the heroes...
at every Ground Zero....-29sep2001

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.

I don't have the specifics; I'm taking the museum officials' word for it. But if it was used as a meeting place and increased morale, thereby helping in the recovery effort, then it has enough significance to be in a museum.The issue here is not whether this object is significant enough to be in a museum (it's already been deemed important enough by the officials), the issue here is whether or not its too religious for a museum that receives money from the government. I said that, in general, spiritual non-secular.You're making it as all or nothing, where one smudge of religious patina makes an item entirely non-secular. I don't agree with that. It played a role as a meeting place and morale booster during the recovery efforts.It was saved from the dump, and we had it right there ready for the museum. Are there other pieces lined-up and ready but being denied? I was asking how many pieces were left that had not been carted off to the dump. Maybe because the dumpers were unaware of the significance...Apparently there's enough significance for there to be an effort to save some of the remaining peices before they are lost too.

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?

Do you honestly think that is a big deal?I see it'd be with other rubble and not being treated differently as religious.Starting from the right:"Thanks for comming folks... Here we have the S-shaped beam, look how violent that crash must've been. In the middle we have a larger piece with an image from the scene of firefighters projected onto it. Next we have a cross-shaped piece that some of the resuers found religious significance in. Over here we have...."Where's the problem?

To be honest it doesn't bother me in this depiction, but that's just me. If it had been placed at say the main entrance by itself then it would bother me.I still have no idea of how it will finally be displayed, if this depiction is how it will be then I don't see no problem with it.

I don't give a flyin flip how the christians spin their fabled ghosts into this scene or why. I don't give a flyin flip whether you or I or anyone else thinks this thing is a religious symbol, a letter "T" or a useless piece of junk like any other rubble in the museum. I don't give a flyin flip if there is any "secular" or "religious" attachment to this thing or not.The only thing that matters is the history.Whether anyone cares to acknowledge it or not for whatever personal reasons they may have or not, this Cross had a unique role as a religious symbol at ground zero during the recovery. Which means it had a unique role at ground zero, period.This thing was found unaltered in its present condition as a piece of debris on site. It was adopted as a religious symbol on site. And don't try to give me any of this BS about how many or how few believed in it or not because that does not change its history. It was a worship station on site. It was a shrine to the fallen on site. No other such artifact existed on site. No other such artifact served this purpose on site. It had a unique meaning on site that no other landmark had on site. These are facts.I don't give a flyin flip that it offends your religious sensibilities. No amount of revisionist BS is going to change the facts of this item's direct historical ties to the site, the recovery effort and the 9/11 disaster in total.You can disagree with this view. That's fine. But if you continue to ask me, like Rrhain does in his highly repetitive attempts to bully and intimidate, then you will get the same answers again.Edited by AZPaul3, : Proper tenseEdited by AZPaul3, : clarity

The Koran had a LARGER role as a religious symbol and _motivation_ for the attack. Are they including a Koran in the museum?Nope. Why not?Because some people would say it's in bad taste to glorify a religious symbol with such negative associations with the attack.Well, guess what? The cross also has majorly negative associations, as a cause of the attack and as a symbol that the God of the terrorists couldn't give a crap about saving lives. Good luck proving that there were no other objects on the site than any one of any religion found significant.Again, just because Christians find something important doesn't mean that all other religious groups vanish.

Did someone find a Koran on site? Did some Koran act as a landmark recognizable to all those working on the site? That is your view of the Cross based upon your personal religious beliefs. Something I share, by the way.But, this does not alter the historical facts of what was on site. Whether the connotations attached are good or bad means nothing. Only the facts of the history of the item matter. Prove a negative? Is that the best intellectual argument you can make?Do you have any such artifact? If so then this as well should be considered for the museum, should it not? Oh, I agree. But what does this have to do with the unique role of this artifact on that site at that time? How does this alter the history? The article does not vanish just because we wish it would. The history is still there.Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.