Group of atheists has filed a lawsuit

I can see both points of view. I have visited the site and it was moving.When I was there, I do not recall seeing any religious iconography.It was simply not required.The standard cross beam shape used in the buildings architecture produced many crosses in the wreckage by chance.If I had seen a cross at the site, the first thing I would have thought is 'where were you?'I am not 100% sure but isnt there a church accross the street from the site?Could they not put the cross, high and mighty as the symbol that it is, out front of the church?They would be able to put it up on a pedestal, all on its own.I am not a christian but I would think that this would make it a much more powerful symbol than if it were in a museum amongst a lot of other artifacts.Would this not solve the problem?

quote:

---

What happens to the people with a different set of majestic laws?

​

What happens to the people who interpret the majestic laws differently to you?

---

Magestive laws should not be of the enforcement kind. They should be agreed to by a composite of humanity, same as rules of cricket are agreed to. Even though almost all laws accepted by humanity's institutions happen to be contained only in one source, the Hebrew bible, this should still need to be processed by humanity if they are acceptable; otherwise they get tossed out, despite how it impacts on one group of humanity - its the price payable for human unity. The point is that the rule by belief does not work - these are in mutually exclusive modes and pits human groups into existential wars.The event at Sinai, whether it really occured or not, is upheld by more than half of humanity, and its laws enshrined within the world's institutions. At the very least, this says that laws are the foremost instrument in the belief of a Creator - more so than revered names. Here, love and peace become law based premises, not the patent of any particular religion.If humanity keeps on the road it is on it will end up where its pointing.

Hello IamJoseph, This is bullshit. The laws get tossed out or the people get tossed out? Can you rephrase?Would you like to have a shot at replying to my statements and answering the questions? If you did, can you rephrase because I cant see it.

quote:

---

Even though almost all laws accepted by humanity's institutions happen to be contained only in one source, the Hebrew bible

​

This is bullshit.

---

Check it out. Did you know that all animal rights laws come from the Hebrew bible? So do judiciary laws, worker's rights [making slaves as contracted workers with rights], inalienable human rights, democrasy [not from Greece!] and women's rights?

quote:

---

The laws get tossed out or the people get tossed out? Can you rephrase?

---

As long as the laws were implemented without corruption, they should be transcendent of any group's preferences. It becomes International law agreed to by all. Its thorniest issue will be that 'names' cannot be applied as laws. Though this would hit Judaism hard [the time factor], they will fare well because it is substantially a law based theology as opposed a belief and name based one. Such compromises are not ungodly things - the reverse view should apply. Such a scenario is not a choice factor - it has to happen if humanity is to go forth.

Butterflytyrant observes: Wow, would it. It would be a bigger move in all ways. Rrhain has also argued this.

Its last location before being moved back to the WTC memorial was a church....think it was the one across the street maybe?? Go figure...

IamJoseph,I have asked you time and time again to start your own thread with regards to your claims. I have even sent you a PM. Yet you continue to spash your bullshit in random threads.Rule 4 of the forum guidelines - Your point - Your evidence of this point - You need to verify your claims when you make them.I have been through the 613 Mitzvot and find them to be pretty unpleasent overall. I am glad you are wrong in stating that most of the laws of humanity come from them.To target the issues you mentioned in order -Animal rights -
Animal sacrifice Call up PETA and ask them if animal sacrifice classes as animal rights. Also, all of the Kosher slaughter laws are bullshit and inhumane.Here are some quotes about Kosher slaughtering : I know the temple was destroyed so you cant go around killing random animals in a brutal way to honour your god but that does not change the fact that the laws are there.A few common laws relating to animal rights NOT in your list of laws.1. How about the fact that ANIMALS HAVE RIGHTS at all, that they are even sentient?
2. How about DONT SACRIFICE ANIMALS?This is animal rights as covered by Genesis -
Genesis (1:20—28) [Adam is given] "dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth."Nice.Judiciary lawsI dont think you are using this term correctly as 'judiciary laws' (the two words together) dont really make sense and dont actually describe anything.Judiciary - The judiciary (also known as the judicial system or judicature) is the system of courts that interprets and applies the law in the name of the state. The judiciary also provides a mechanism for the resolution of disputes. Under the doctrine of the separation of powers, the judiciary generally does not make law (that is, in a plenary fashion, which is the responsibility of the legislature) or enforce law (which is the responsibility of the executive), but rather interprets law and applies it to the facts of each case. (wiki source: Judiciary - Wikipedia)Do you mean Judicial procedure?Workers rights - Slavery. Seriously, where the fuck does slavery fit into workers rights?A few important common things missing from those laws. minimum wage, standard hours of working days and working weeks, workplace health and safety lawsHuman rights -First of all, FUCKING SLAVERY!From the Decleration of human rights (article 4) there is this one as well, another one of you so called human rights laws... Can you spot where there may be a small human rights violation there? I will help you out. YOU CANT TAKE WOMEN AS CAPTIVES.or how about these... Have you made sure you have totally wiped out all of the descendents of these nations? Do you really think that the children of these groups human rights are upheld here?How about these laws... This is genocide. You are aware that genocide is considered to be a breach of human rights arent you?Just to make sure I have hammered the point home... Executions. Death by stoning and burning people to death. Can you tell me how you believe that your laws are protecting human rights here?Democracy - Greece circa 500BCE, there are some writings in the Epic of Gilgamesh that suggest the Sumarians had a primitive democracy. Also, 6th Century India may have had some semblence of primitive democracy but there are insufficient sources to verify.Sources -
History of democracy - Wikipedia
Page not found - History for Kids
Democracy - Wikipedia
HISTORY OF DEMOCRACYWomens rights -I only need to put two of your laws in here. Can you tell me how you think that forcing a man who violates (rapes) a virgin to marry her and never be able to divorce her is a good thing for womens rights?A large amount of the laws you hold so dear are barbaric, pointless or have been replaced by better laws. A huge amount of modern laws is not even discussed in your laws.You do great, great disrespect to all of the men and women who have actually worked, fought, bled and died to create the laws and rights that you attempt to usurp. Edited by Butterflytyrant, : No reason given.

Hey Xongsmith,My comment was phrased as a question, not a statement. I live in Australia so have not exactly got my finger on the pulse of NYC at the moment.As a symbol, I thought that having the cross, up on a pedistal, out in the open where the sun can shine on it and people can view it 24/7 would be better. Much better than in a museum. If it is on its own, i believe that it would better represent the solidarity that the people felt on that day. The crisis created one people that day. I felt that it was a better use of the symbol.It would also resolve the issue of it being on public land. If it was on church ground. noone can touch it People can gather at the church and then pray in that church. It is a place for them. A place particularly for them.A bigger move? with the amount of shit they have moved around on that site, a few more bit of steel should not be a problem.

quote:

---

You need to verify your claims when you make them.

​

I have been through the 613 Mitzvot and find them to be pretty unpleasent overall. I am glad you are wrong in stating that most of the laws of humanity come from them.

​

To target the issues you mentioned in order -

​

Animal rights -
Animal sacrifice

---

I don't make up things and any red blooded Christian should know these laws - it is where all animal rights come from, including safe environment during transportation, stunning during slaughter, onus of feeding, free range, etc, and these are exclusively listed in the Hebrew bible. You listed only ritual and sacrifical memorial rights, which are not universal but prefixed 'unto you' . You omitted all animal rights laws:

quote:

---

ANIMAL RIGHTS.

​

1. Not to stand by idly when a human or domestic animal life is in danger (Lev. 19:16) (CCN82).
2. To relieve a neighbor of his burden and help to unload his beast (Ex. 23:5) (CCA70).
3. To assist in replacing the load upon a neighbor's beast (Deut. 22:4) (CCA71).
4. Not to leave a beast, that has fallen down beneath its burden, unaided (Deut. 22:4)
5. Not to reap the entire field (Lev. 19:9; Lev. 23:22) (negative) (CCI6).
6. Not to have intercourse with a beast (Lev. 18:23) (CCN117).
7. That a woman shall not have intercourse with a beast (Lev. 18:23) (CCN118).
8. Not to castrate the male of any species; neither a man, nor a domestic or wild beast, nor a fowl (Lev. 22:24) (CCN143).
9. Not to eat the flesh of a beast that died of itself (Deut. 14:21) (CCN86).
10. To slay cattle, deer and fowl according to the laws of shechitah if their flesh is to be eaten (Deut. 12:21) ("as I have commanded" in this verse refers to the technique) (CCA48). See Kosher slaughtering.
11. Not to eat a limb removed from a living beast (Deut. 12:23) (CCN90).
12. Not to slaughter an animal and its young on the same day (Lev. 22:28) (CCN108).
13. Not to take the mother-bird with the young (Deut. 22:6) (CCN189). See Treatment of Animals.
14. To set the mother-bird free when taking the nest (Deut. 22:6-7) (CCA74). See Treatment of Animals.
15. Not to boil meat with milk (Ex. 23:19) (CCN91). See Separation of Meat and Dairy.
16. Not to eat flesh with milk (Ex. 34:26)
17. Not to eat blood (Lev. 7:26) (CCN89). See Draining of Blood.
18. To cover the blood of undomesticated animals (deer, etc.) and of fowl that have been killed (Lev. 17:13) (CCA49).
19. To make a parapet for your roof (Deut. 22:8) (CCA75).
20. Not to leave something that might cause hurt to domesticated animals and fowl. (Deut. 22:8) (CCN190).
21. Not to cross-breed cattle of different species (Lev. 19:19)
21. Not to work with beasts of different species, yoked together (Deut. 22:10) (CCN180).

---

Why don't you start a topic on this instead of continuing to post off-topic. What does animal rights have to do with the AA lawsuit or the placement of the WTC cross? Don't blame it on answering other Off_Topic post....your a big boy and should know when you are wandering away from the topic.

quote:

---

Call up PETA and ask them if animal sacrifice classes as animal rights. Also, all of the Kosher slaughter laws are bullshit and inhumane.

---

Inhumane? Do you even understand why one must not mix an animal in milk? A human may not be able to identify which animal a milk is from - but an animal can - that's how fastidious the animal rights are in the Hebrew bible. The aspect of stunning [rendering an animal unconscious] is what kosher slaughtering is all about, namely in ancient times a particular throat vein did this job.

quote:

---

Here are some quotes about Kosher slaughtering :

---

Aside from banning, every court case was won, as in Canada some years ago which made a major action along with foremost biologists and experts.

quote:

---

Judiciary laws

​

I dont think you are using this term correctly as 'judiciary laws' (the two words together) dont really make sense and dont actually describe anything.

​

Judiciary - The judiciary (also known as the judicial system or judicature) is the system of courts that interprets and applies the law in the name of the state. The judiciary also provides a mechanism for the resolution of disputes. Under the doctrine of the separation of powers, the judiciary generally does not make law (that is, in a plenary fashion, which is the responsibility of the legislature) or enforce law (which is the responsibility of the executive), but rather interprets law and applies it to the facts of each case. (wiki source: Judiciary - Wikipedia)

​

Do you mean Judicial procedure?

---

I used the term loosely, to denote a law which is enshrined as law and enforceable. E.g. perjury, bearing false witness; slander; compensation; bankrupsy and debt limitations; superannuation and retirement rights; incest bounderies; women's rights; environmental rights [not to destroy a fruit bearing tree even during battle]; arms length legal judgements; minimal witness requirements; not to hear one party's case; accidental death and property damage; onus to erect courts and judges before water wells; etc. These laws are contained only in the Hebrew bible, which have spurned a host iof derivitive by-laws and torts throughout history.

quote:

---

Workers rights -

​

199.To keep the Canaanite slave forever (Lev. 25:46)
200.Not to surrender a slave, who has fled to the land of Israel, to his owner who lives outside Palestine (Deut. 23:16)

---

Slaves were once the norm form of wealth throughout the world and history. They became contracted workers with rights only by the Hebrew laws.

quote:

---

A few important common things missing from those laws. minimum wage, standard hours of working days and working weeks, workplace health and safety laws

---

False. One day of rest a week with pay; lump sum payment on retiring; the right for a slave [worker] to marry and have a family; automatic freedom on the Jubilee year; and a host more - these were flaunted by the world, especially by Rome and Europe till recently. Would you like references?

quote:

---

Human rights -

​

First of all, FUCKING SLAVERY!

​

From the Decleration of human rights (article 4)

​

No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

​

there is this one as well, another one of you so called human rights laws...

---

Read up where the US Constitution comes from, instead of viewing ancient 3000 year old history with today's rose tinted lens.

quote:

---

604.To deal with a beautiful woman taken captive in war in the manner prescribed in the Torah (Deut. 21:10-14)

​

Can you spot where there may be a small human rights violation there? I will help you out. YOU CANT TAKE WOMEN AS CAPTIVES.

---

Your not very smart. The laws applicable for women captives makes it impossible to mistreat her. The man must either marry her or release her. Read up again.

quote:

---

or how about these...

​

601.Not to keep alive any individual of the seven Canaanite nations (Deut. 20:16)
602.To exterminate the seven Canaanite nations from the land of Israel (Deut. 20:17)

---

You omitted that the Canaanites first claimed genocide and to action it, refusing all peace offers?

quote:

---

Have you made sure you have totally wiped out all of the descendents of these nations? Do you really think that the children of these groups human rights are upheld here?

---

How blatantly antithetical. You pick a spot in a 4000 year history, then describe it in reverse mode. Have you heard of the Jews doing this in any part of the world ever? How about European Christianity and Islam?

quote:

---

How about these laws...

​

611.Always to remember what Amalek did (Deut. 25:17)
612.That the evil done to us by Amalek shall not be forgotten (Deut.25:19)

​

613.To destroy the seed of Amalek (Deut. 25:19)

---

That refers to the biblical version of the Nazis. What is your point?

quote:

---

This is genocide. You are aware that genocide is considered to be a breach of human rights arent you?

---

Then point your finger where it belongs.

quote:

---

Just to make sure I have hammered the point home...

​

285.That the Court shall pass sentence of death by decapitation with the sword (Ex. 21:20; Lev. 26:25)
286.That the Court shall pass sentence of death by strangulation (Lev. 20:10)

​

287.That the Court shall pass sentence of death by burning with fire (Lev. 20:14)

​

288.That the Court shall pass sentence of death by stoning (Deut.22:24)

​

289.To hang the dead body of one who has incurred that penalty (Deut. 21:22)

​

Executions. Death by stoning and burning people to death. Can you tell me how you believe that your laws are protecting human rights here?

---

Those are the prescribed sentences for major crimes, to be conducted under supervision and court decisions. There were no electric chairs or guns 3,500 years ago.

quote:

---

Democracy - Greece circa 500BCE, there are some writings in the Epic of Gilgamesh that suggest the Sumarians had a primitive democracy. Also, 6th Century India may have had some semblence of primitive democracy but there are insufficient sources to verify.

---

Produce hard copy proof of it as older than the Hebrew bible? Democrasy is not 'LET THE MAJORITY DECIDE' - otherwise Hitler and Sadaam Hussein would be the most democraticaly elected rulers. Before accepting votes, it is obligatory to provide barriers to corruption, enforcement and inducements; only then must the voting of a majority be acceptable, and this comes from here:DEMOCRASY.To give the decision according to the majority, when there is a difference of opinion among the members of the Court as to matters of law (Ex. 23:2) (affirmative).Not to decide, in capital cases, according to the view of the majority, when those who are for condemnation exceed by one only, those who are for acquittal (Ex. 23:2) (negative).Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil; neither shalt thou bear witness in a cause to turn aside after a multitude to pervert justice; (Ex. 23:2) (negative).

quote:

---

Womens rights -

​

I only need to put two of your laws in here.

​

301.That the violator (of an unbetrothed virgin) shall marry her (Deut. 22:28-29)

---

If the violator later broke the promise to marry her.

quote:

---

That one who has raped a damsel and has then (in accordance with the law) married her, may not divorce her (Deut. 22:29)

---

Because in ancient times that woman will have no chance of a life elsewhere.

quote:

---

Can you tell me how you think that forcing a man who violates (rapes) a virgin to marry her and never be able to divorce her is a good thing for womens rights?

---

I did.

quote:

---

A large amount of the laws you hold so dear are barbaric, pointless or have been replaced by better laws. A huge amount of modern laws is not even discussed in your laws.

​

You do great, great disrespect to all of the men and women who have actually worked, fought, bled and died to create the laws and rights that you attempt to usurp.

---

You mean like these barbaric laws:

quote:

---

The Court and Judicial Procedure
227. To appoint judges and officers in every community (Deut. 16:18) (affirmative).
228. Not to appoint as a judge, a person who is not well versed in the laws, even if he is expert in other branches of knowledge (Deut. 1:17) (CCN64).
229. To adjudicate cases of purchase and sale (Lev. 25:14) (CCA67).
230. To judge cases of liability of a paid depositary (Ex. 22:9) (affirmative).
231. To adjudicate cases of loss for which a gratuitous borrower is liable (Ex. 22:13-14) (affirmative).
232. To adjudicate cases of inheritances (Num. 27:8-11) (CCA73).
233. To judge cases of damage caused by an uncovered pit (Ex. 21:33-34) (affirmative).
234. To judge cases of injuries caused by beasts (Ex. 21:35-36) (affirmative).
235. To adjudicate cases of damage caused by trespass of cattle (Ex. 22:4) (affirmative).
236. To adjudicate cases of damage caused by fire (Ex. 22:5) (affirmative).
237. To adjudicate cases of damage caused by a gratuitous depositary (Ex. 22:6-7) (affirmative).
238. To adjudicate other cases between a plaintiff and a defendant (Ex. 22:8) (affirmative).
239. Not to curse a judge (Ex. 22:27) (CCN63).
240. That one who possesses evidence shall testify in Court (Lev. 5:1) (affirmative).
241. Not to testify falsely (Ex. 20:13) (CCN39).
242. That a witness, who has testified in a capital case, shall not lay down the law in that particular case (Num. 35:30) (negative).
243. That a transgressor shall not testify (Ex. 23:1) (CCN75).
244. That the court shall not accept the testimony of a close relative of the defendant in matters of capital punishment (Deut. 24:16) (CCN74).
245. Not to hear one of the parties to a suit in the absence of the other party (Ex. 23:1) (CCN65).
246. To examine witnesses thoroughly (Deut. 13:15) (affirmative).
247. Not to decide a case on the evidence of a single witness (Deut. 19:15) (CCN73).
248. To give the decision according to the majority, when there is a difference of opinion among the members of the Sanhedrin as to matters of law (Ex. 23:2) (affirmative).
249. Not to decide, in capital cases, according to the view of the majority, when those who are for condemnation exceed by one only, those who are for acquittal (Ex. 23:2) (negative).
250. 2 Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil; neither shalt thou bear witness in a cause to turn aside after a multitude to pervert justice; (Ex. 23:2) (negative).
251. To treat parties in a litigation with equal impartiality (Lev. 19:15) (affirmative).
252. Not to render iniquitous decisions (Lev. 19:15) (CCN69).
253. Not to favor a great man when trying a case (Lev. 19:15) (CCN70).
254. Not to take a bribe (Ex. 23:8) (CCN71).
255. Not to be afraid of a bad man, when trying a case (Deut. 1:17) (CCN72).
256. Not to be moved in trying a case, by the poverty of one of the parties (Ex. 23:3; Lev. 19:15) (CCN66).
257. Not to pervert the judgment of strangers or orphans (Deut. 24:17) (CCN68).
258. Not to pervert the judgment of a sinner (a person poor in fulfillment of commandments) (Ex. 23:6) (CCN67).
259. Not to render a decision on one's personal opinion, but only on the evidence of two witnesses, who saw what actually occurred (Ex. 23:7) (negative).
260. Not to execute one guilty of a capital offense, before he has stood his trial (Num. 35:12) (negative).
261. To accept the rulings of every Supreme Court in Israel (Deut. 17:11) (affirmative).
262. Not to rebel against the orders of the Court (Deut. 17:11) (CCN158).
Injuries and Damages
263. To make a parapet for your roof (Deut. 22:8) (CCA75). See Love and Brotherhood.
264. Not to leave something that might cause hurt (Deut. 22:8) (CCN190). See Love and Brotherhood.
265. To save the pursued even at the cost of the life of the pursuer (Deut. 25:12) (affirmative). See Life.
266. Not to spare a pursuer, but he is to be slain before he reaches the pursued and slays the latter, or uncovers his nakedness (Deut. 25:12) (negative).
Property and Property Rights
267. Not to sell a field in the land of Israel in perpetuity (Lev. 25:23) (negative).
268. Not to change the character of the open land (about the cities of) the Levites or of their fields; not to sell it in perpetuity, but it may be redeemed at any time (Lev. 25:34) (negative). See Levi.
269. That houses sold within a walled city may be redeemed within a year (Lev. 25:29) (affirmative).
270. Not to remove landmarks (property boundaries) (Deut. 19:14) (CCN85).
271. Not to swear falsely in denial of another's property rights (Lev. 19:11) (CCN30).
272. Not to deny falsely another's property rights (Lev. 19:11) (CCN36).
273. Never to settle in the land of Egypt (Deut. 17:16) (CCN192).
274. Not to steal personal property (Lev. 19:11) (CCN34).
275. To restore that which one took by robbery (Lev. 5:23) (CCA68).
276. To return lost property (Deut. 22:1) (CCA69).
277. Not to pretend not to have seen lost property, to avoid the obligation to return it (Deut. 22:3) (CCN182).
Criminal Laws
278. Not to slay an innocent person (Ex. 20:13) (CCN32). See Life.
279. Not to kidnap any person (Ex. 20:13) (according to the Talmud, this verse refers to stealing a person, distinguished from Lev. 19:11, regarding the taking of property) (CCN33).
280. Not to rob by violence (Lev. 19:13) (CCN35).
281. Not to defraud (Lev. 19:13) (CCN37).
282. Not to covet what belongs to another (Ex. 20:14) (CCN40).
283. Not to crave something that belongs to another (Deut. 5:18) (CCN41).
284. Not to indulge in evil thoughts and sights (Num. 15:39) (CCN156).

---

Should not atheists know the law and where it comes from - before filing a law suit? In any case, I am responding to posts which make false claims with impudence.

IamJoseph,Start you own thread with your claims.I keep asking you to do this but you wont.Your reluctance only makes it more clear that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, have no way of backing up any of your claims and are just making noise to please yourself.Here is a copy of the PM I sent you in case you have not opened it. Put up or shut up.You have those two options. Your actions will show your worth.I believe your arguements are worthless. I believe that you are an intellectual coward. Not starting your own thread will prove this to be 100% true.Edited by Butterflytyrant, : No reason given.Edited by Butterflytyrant, : No reason given.

You can start a thread if you like, however I won't indulge in this thread any more. I have check mated some here so why push it.

At least you got this going for you... Atheist could care less about some BS biblical rant about where you think our laws come from. The only laws that matter in this case is the laws of the USA regardless of what you think.