Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Group of atheists has filed a lawsuit
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2493 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


(1)
Message 241 of 479 (629300)
08-16-2011 7:47 PM
Reply to: Message 228 by New Cat's Eye
08-16-2011 10:24 AM


Re: "Secular Purpose"...........?
I think non-christians found spiritual comfort in the cross too so there could be a case here for the provision of spiritual comfort being non-sectarian.
Are you being serious?
You REALLY think that Muslim Americans found _SPIRITUAL COMFORT_ in a Christian symbol on the site of a terrorist attack which lead many Christians to seek out and kill people they thought were muslim.
You REALLY think that the Buddhist relatives of victims of the attack, which was - let's face it, a religious attack by Islamists against a power they saw is being anti-Islam, pro-Israel and Christian, found SPIRITUAL COMFORT in being reminded that THEIR RELIGION doesn't count in the eyes of the two parties involved? That they were just innocent victims of some stupid religious war between the Jews, the 2nd Jews and the 3rd Jews?
REALLY?!
Come on.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 228 by New Cat's Eye, posted 08-16-2011 10:24 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 243 by New Cat's Eye, posted 08-17-2011 4:46 PM Nuggin has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 242 of 479 (629428)
08-17-2011 4:41 PM
Reply to: Message 235 by Straggler
08-16-2011 3:03 PM


Re: "Secular Purpose"...........?
Sure - Like bits of the Berlin wall. But if it were just a "bit of building" it could be placed on it's side, upside down or whatever couldn't it?
If... could... sure.
But its not *just* a bit of building and its already mounted upright (so you'd need a reason to modify it to be placed differently).
Which is where Cavedivers example of something like a heart shape would come into play. But a giant Christian crucifix-shaped object just happened to spiritually inspire a bunch of people and you are claiming that it has nothing to do with any specific religion?
No. Quote me where I've said it has nothing to do with any specifc religion.
This particular item obviously has something to do with a specific religion. I said that "providing spiritual comfort" doesn't necessarily make something sectarian or non-secular.
Then they are in the same denial that you are.
Or maybe you're just wrong.
But I guess it is easier to make silly assertions about a giant crucifix having a "secular purpose" than to actually make the argument (that I would have some sympathy for) that it deserves to be in the museum as a religious symbol significant to the events of 9/11.
That has been my argument the whole time... part of which is that it also has a secular purpose.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 235 by Straggler, posted 08-16-2011 3:03 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 245 by Nuggin, posted 08-17-2011 5:34 PM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 309 by Straggler, posted 08-19-2011 2:07 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 243 of 479 (629429)
08-17-2011 4:46 PM
Reply to: Message 241 by Nuggin
08-16-2011 7:47 PM


Re: "Secular Purpose"...........?
You REALLY think that Muslim Americans found _SPIRITUAL COMFORT_ in a Christian symbol on the site of a terrorist attack which lead many Christians to seek out and kill people they thought were muslim.
Yes, Nugs. EVERY Muslim that has EVER seen a cross has found spiritual comfort in it EVERY time
You REALLY think that the Buddhist relatives of victims of the attack, which was - let's face it, a religious attack by Islamists against a power they saw is being anti-Islam, pro-Israel and Christian, found SPIRITUAL COMFORT in being reminded that THEIR RELIGION doesn't count in the eyes of the two parties involved? That they were just innocent victims of some ****** religious war between the Jews, the 2nd Jews and the 3rd Jews?
Of course. EVERY Buddhist that sees a cross instantly received spiritual comfort EVERY time the lay their eyes on it
REALLY?!
Oh yeah... and this is my coffee mug:
Geez, you're gettin' to be about as bad as Theodoric.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 241 by Nuggin, posted 08-16-2011 7:47 PM Nuggin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 244 by Nuggin, posted 08-17-2011 5:32 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied
 Message 247 by fearandloathing, posted 08-17-2011 6:10 PM New Cat's Eye has seen this message but not replied

  
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2493 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 244 of 479 (629436)
08-17-2011 5:32 PM
Reply to: Message 243 by New Cat's Eye
08-17-2011 4:46 PM


Re: "Secular Purpose"...........?
EVERY Muslim that has EVER seen a cross has found spiritual comfort in it EVERY time
EVERY Buddhist that sees a cross instantly received spiritual comfort EVERY time the lay their eyes on it
I think there is some fundamental things you don't understand about other religions.
Muslims aren't just another kind of Protestant. Buddhists aren't some sect of Jesuits.
These are religious groups which fundamentally disagree with your own. They don't hold the cross to be sacred, and in many instances find it offensive.
For example, when you mount a cross as some sort of rallying cry to wage war on members of another religion - like this cross is.
Or if you use the cross as some sort of memorial to the dead of other religions - which this cross is also doing.
It's offensive.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 243 by New Cat's Eye, posted 08-17-2011 4:46 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2493 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 245 of 479 (629437)
08-17-2011 5:34 PM
Reply to: Message 242 by New Cat's Eye
08-17-2011 4:41 PM


Re: "Secular Purpose"...........?
But its not *just* a bit of building and its already mounted upright (so you'd need a reason to modify it to be placed differently).
Can't have it both ways. Either it's a bit of the building an it belongs there no matter what the orientation
-or-
There is an "upright" orientation, and it's not *just* a bit of building, in which case it needs to go.
What I still don't understand is why Christians what to rub it in everyone's face that they believe that their God WANTED 9/11 to happen.
It seems counter productive to the point of the museum.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 242 by New Cat's Eye, posted 08-17-2011 4:41 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 246 by New Cat's Eye, posted 08-17-2011 5:58 PM Nuggin has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 246 of 479 (629441)
08-17-2011 5:58 PM
Reply to: Message 245 by Nuggin
08-17-2011 5:34 PM


Re: "Secular Purpose"...........?
Can't have it both ways. Either it's a bit of the building an it belongs there no matter what the orientation
-or-
There is an "upright" orientation, and it's not *just* a bit of building, in which case it needs to go.
No, I disagree. Having religious symbolism is not enough to warrant its going, especially since it passes the Lemon Test.
I think there is some fundamental things you don't understand about other religions.
Is that because you can't see smileys or because you don't know what they mean?
Or if you use the cross as some sort of memorial to the dead of other religions - which this cross is also doing.
It's offensive.
I don't doubt that there are some people that are offended by it. I mean, the OP mentions a lawsuit with people claiming exactly that.
But that doesn't matter to the legal debate.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 245 by Nuggin, posted 08-17-2011 5:34 PM Nuggin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 248 by Nuggin, posted 08-17-2011 6:16 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
fearandloathing
Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 990
From: Burlington, NC, USA
Joined: 02-24-2011


Message 247 of 479 (629443)
08-17-2011 6:10 PM
Reply to: Message 243 by New Cat's Eye
08-17-2011 4:46 PM


Re: "Secular Purpose"...........?
CS writes:
Geez, you're gettin' to be about as bad as Theodoric.
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?
Always treat other members with respect. Argue the position, not the person. Avoid abusive, harassing and invasive behavior. Avoid needling, hectoring and goading tactics.
Just saying....
Now back to the topic please.

"No sympathy for the devil; keep that in mind. Buy the ticket, take the ride...and if it occasionally gets a little heavier than what you had in mind, well...maybe chalk it off to forced conscious expansion: Tune in, freak out, get beaten."
Hunter S. Thompson
Ad astra per aspera
Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 243 by New Cat's Eye, posted 08-17-2011 4:46 PM New Cat's Eye has seen this message but not replied

  
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2493 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 248 of 479 (629444)
08-17-2011 6:16 PM
Reply to: Message 246 by New Cat's Eye
08-17-2011 5:58 PM


Re: "Secular Purpose"...........?
No, I disagree. Having religious symbolism is not enough to warrant its going, especially since it passes the Lemon Test.
Pretending you didn't lose an argument earlier in the thread doesn't make those pages of the thread disappear.
I refer you back to your previous attempts to prove this in which you fail miserably.
I think there is some fundamental things you don't understand about other religions.
Is that because you can't see smileys or because you don't know what they mean?
Neither, it's because you clearly don't understand that just because you are a Christian, that doesn't make everyone else ALSO a Christian.
But that doesn't matter to the legal debate.
You already lost the legal debate.
What I've moved onto is the fact that chrisitans are trying to brag about the fact that their God killed thousands of Americans and what to mount a symbol on the site to shove it in everyone's face.
That's offensive.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 246 by New Cat's Eye, posted 08-17-2011 5:58 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 249 by New Cat's Eye, posted 08-17-2011 6:20 PM Nuggin has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 249 of 479 (629446)
08-17-2011 6:20 PM
Reply to: Message 248 by Nuggin
08-17-2011 6:16 PM


Re: "Secular Purpose"...........?
I refer you back to your previous attempts to prove this in which you fail miserably.
You already lost the legal debate.
I don't know what you're typing about...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 248 by Nuggin, posted 08-17-2011 6:16 PM Nuggin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 250 by Nuggin, posted 08-17-2011 11:31 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2493 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 250 of 479 (629460)
08-17-2011 11:31 PM
Reply to: Message 249 by New Cat's Eye
08-17-2011 6:20 PM


Re: "Secular Purpose"...........?
I don't know what you're typing about...
The topic of the thread refers to a groups legal challenge to prevent Christians from hijacking the 9/11 museum with their iconography simply because right angles are popular in construction.
I would think that 250 messages in you would actually bother to figure out what the debate is about. Seems like a waste to be posting if you don't understand the topic

This message is a reply to:
 Message 249 by New Cat's Eye, posted 08-17-2011 6:20 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 269 by New Cat's Eye, posted 08-18-2011 11:03 AM Nuggin has replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 251 of 479 (629478)
08-18-2011 2:41 AM
Reply to: Message 222 by IamJoseph
08-16-2011 2:36 AM


IamJoseph responds to me:
quote:
quote:
That's not the Golden Rule. That's the Silver Rule. And no, I'm not making that up.
The Golden Rule is, as everyone knows, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."
Put your thinking cap on. Isabela of Spain
Huh? What does Isabella I have to do with anything?
You claimed that the Golden Rule is "Do not do unto others as you would not have them do unto you." That's not the Golden Rule. That's the Silver Rule.
What does Isabella I have to do with that?

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 222 by IamJoseph, posted 08-16-2011 2:36 AM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 254 by IamJoseph, posted 08-18-2011 2:59 AM Rrhain has replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


(1)
Message 252 of 479 (629479)
08-18-2011 2:44 AM
Reply to: Message 223 by IamJoseph
08-16-2011 2:38 AM


IamJoseph responds to me:
quote:
quote:
And yet Europe is doing so much better than America.
Don't you mean Eurostan?
Huh? There is no such place.
Instead, there's Europe. It has better health care, better social outcomes, and while it is going through a financial crisis, it is not as bad as it is here in the US. The problem, of course, is that some countries in Europe, under influence from the US-backed IMF, are enforcing conservative economic principles of "austerity" which are making things worse.
In economic downturns, governments must spend more, not less. They're the only ones who can. The economy will never recover without demand. Demand cannot come from the workers who have no jobs. Suppliers will never hire without demand. No hiring means no jobs and it becomes a downward spiral. Therefore, as we learned back in the 30s during the Depression, it is incumbent upon governments to step in and spend the money nobody else can in order to stimulate the economy. The stimulus only "failed" in the sense that it wasn't big enough.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 223 by IamJoseph, posted 08-16-2011 2:38 AM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 255 by IamJoseph, posted 08-18-2011 3:11 AM Rrhain has not replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 253 of 479 (629481)
08-18-2011 2:55 AM
Reply to: Message 225 by cavediver
08-16-2011 4:26 AM


cavediver writes:
quote:
quote:
The government doesn't get to regulate religion and religion doesn't get to meddle in the government.
I get that. What has that to do with what is included in a national museum? Are all religious artefacts to be excluded?
It's government money. Therefore, if religious items are going to be included, they need to have some signficance beyond their sectarian purpose. And not just trivially so but significanctly so. It's why religious schools can't receive government funds. Yes, the educational purpose of schools is very important, but if the school is going to teach religious doctrine, then that overwhelms any other purpose. Even if it's only a single prayer given at graduation after 12 years of completely secular education, that single act is a violation of the Constitution and cannot be allowed.
The only significance of this particular item is specifically tied to its religious patina. It wasn't the piece that was hit by the planes, it wasn't the first or last piece of the building laid, it wasn't the piece that was proof that the architectural design would work, or anything like that.
Since it has no purpose other than as a religious item, it doesn't belong in a government museum. It belongs in a church.
quote:
On a publicly-funded archaeological dig, are religious sites to be ignored?
Is there something other than its religious significance that makes it important? Hint: You said so yourself as to why it might have some significance other than as a religious site.
quote:
On a publicly-funded sociological study, are religious beliefs to be ignored?
Is there something other than its religious significance that makes it important? Hint: You said so yourself as to why it might have some significance other than as a religious tally.
quote:
Let us, for sake of argument, say that it had significance to *all* the workers on the site. Do you still maintain that it does not belong in a museum?
Yes. The number of people who imparted religious significance is irrelevant since the only significance this item has is religious.
quote:
Let us, for sake of argument, say that my heart-shaped girder had significance to *all* the workers on the site. Could that belong in a museum?
Is a heart a religious symbol?
quote:
Let us, for sake of argument, say that my OSL-shaped girder had significance to *all* the workers on the site. Could that belong in a museum?
Is OSL a religious symbol?
You may not like that religion has been singled out, but the Constitution has specifically done so.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 225 by cavediver, posted 08-16-2011 4:26 AM cavediver has not replied

  
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3668 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 254 of 479 (629482)
08-18-2011 2:59 AM
Reply to: Message 251 by Rrhain
08-18-2011 2:41 AM


DON'T BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU BELIEVE.
quote:
You claimed that the Golden Rule is "Do not do unto others as you would not have them do unto you." That's not the Golden Rule. That's the Silver Rule.
What does Isabella have to do with that?
The golden rule I suggested is the true golden one, from a Hebrew sage 150 BCE. I tried to show you how Isabela used the European golden rule, imposing her will to cause 1000's to be killed in the 15th Century. What is good for Europe may be death to others from a different belief and culture. I tried to show you that while penicilin can save lives, it can also kill those who have no tolerance for it. Pls consider if you would like another to do unto you what they think is good for themselves - irrespective of your own preference and will? One golden rule is racist and hell bent on domination and potential genocide. Think it over.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 251 by Rrhain, posted 08-18-2011 2:41 AM Rrhain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 258 by Rrhain, posted 08-18-2011 4:04 AM IamJoseph has replied

  
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3668 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 255 of 479 (629484)
08-18-2011 3:11 AM
Reply to: Message 252 by Rrhain
08-18-2011 2:44 AM


quote:
And yet Europe is doing so much better than America.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't you mean Eurostan?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Huh? There is no such place.
The terms Eurostan and Londonistan are the subject of two best selling books of things to come, with Paristan coming out soon: these emminent books speak for themselves. The big picture says if a law suit needs to be made, it should be directed at Europe: the greatest post-W.W.II crime is the corruption of the Balfour Declaration, which carved off 80% of a tiny land allocated for the Jews. This most evil deed remains illegal, perpetrated under extreme duress when the Jews were totally helpless following W.W.II.
It was followed by serial 2-state demands in the same land and the re-transfer of the name Palestinian from Jews onto those openly panting for another holocaust. Rocket science what its intentions are, yet all Christians remained deathly silent. Eurostan is a payback - using the same tools and weapons planed for Israel. All for 30 barrels of oil, giving BORN IN SIN a whole new non-virtual meaning.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 252 by Rrhain, posted 08-18-2011 2:44 AM Rrhain has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024