We should keep the cross up

Post Reply New Topic

im sure many of you have seen on the news, and if you havent go ahead and click on this link right here http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/ath ... 49616.html . Personally i think we should keep the cross up, and the people dont have a right to sue for them putting the cross up. i have nothing against Atheists, and i respect all peoples spiritual practices, but keep in mind that there were christians who died in that terrible disaster along with others, and we usually use the cross to represent those who have passed away in car accidents or have died in service, since ive seen crosses along roadsides where someone was killed, or crossses in certain graveyards to represent soldiers who have died while serving this country. This really reminds me of a couple yrs ago, when they tried to get rid of the soldier memorial in the mojave desert out west(im not sure how you spell it) where they tried to get rid of the big white cross because people were offended. The way i see it we have every right to practice our own religion, and if you want to be atheist then you should be one because that is your right as an american, and when i say this next part keep in mind im only specifically talking about these four atheists in particuliar, and not in general, because ive met athesists before in person and some of them are really nice people . but i wonder if these atheists who are suing for this would be happy if we tried changing them the same way these four people are trying to keep the christians from honoring their dead. LKL also mentioned that we should use all the religious symbols for the memorial, which i think is a great idea , since we would be able to honor all different religions

Last edited by bradt4evr on 28 Jul 2011, 11:58 pm, edited 2 times in total.

There are more groups than atheists complaining about the cross. Jews are not represented by a cross, nor are muslims, nor are atheists, nor even are christians whose crosses are shaped differently. The fact that some christians like to pretend that their cross represents everyone is nothing more than christian arrogance presuming that their god is the only one that can legitimately represent anyone. If the cross is allowed to stay, then at the very least they must allow other types of crosses, a star of David, a moon and star, and any other symbol from a group who had representatives amongs the victims of that tragedy.

Hey thats not a bad idea that way everyone can be happy and we can honor all people, ill have to add that in because i really like that idea, btw where did you get your Native American avatar, i love it!

I suspect they will probably end up including religious insignias (maybe not every style variation) that each next of kin wants used. It would probably make a better historical statement about the attacks that way anyway.

well, they said that if symbols for all the other faiths and non-faiths are included, they will drop the case.

Sounds fair to me.

Personally i think the cross was more effective at the chapel, and frankly i'm disappointed that the cleanup guys didn't pull a few dozen more T-joints out of the rubble and place them at churches. There could have been some good money in manufacturing false idols, since it's just a damn T-joint made of girders.

I really |hink |ha| i| is ra|her s|upid |o |ry |o make all vis|as crossfree.

Besides being mean spiri|ed - and discrimina|ory unless |hey can iden|ify and remove every bloedig shape |ha| has ever been a religious symbol. I hasve in |his pos| done my par| by eliminas|ing the le||er |ha| comes be|ween S and U - |he one |ha| looks like a cross, which being a very simple shape appears as a le||er in a grea| many alphabe|s.

BU| |he le||er be|ween B and D is s|ill here, even |hough i| looks like an Islamic crescen|.

----------

Enough of that nonsense - I will go only so far to make a point.

As for including symbols of ALL religions - you can't. You can put one in for each house of worship in your town maybe - but you are till leaving out those Andaman Islanders.

I think it's stupid to have a state sponsored religion.

And religious people would be wise to think so too, lest their religion may some day not be favored by the state.

Perhaps they should erect a Cresecent Moon symbol over the site to remind folks who did the deed.

Allah hu'akbar!

ruveyn

I think atheists need to come up with a symbol. Otherwise all the religious folks get their views represented, but the atheists don't. To someone viewing the symbols, it would appear that none of the victims of 9/11 were atheists, which is almost certainly not the case. It's not fair that atheists should not be memorialized, just because they don't believe in a hereafter.

I rather tennd to think Constantine overall hurt the church - a lot of the big problems might have been avoided. He couldn't have a revelation from Mithrads, no.

Thing is, if the King, or the Waqlimi, or the Grand Pooh Bah, or the Leader, or Big Brother, or the Directorate LIKES a religion, or LIKES atheism, or LIKES acupuncture, it is hard to avoid state religion.

And the Powervolk in the religious organizations [I spit me of organizations] tend to be finbe with that if they are the ones picked.

Yes. They are acting as though this cross was commissioned or at least intentionally made. It was a piece of rubble that was assigned meaning by Christians after the fact. Those who are not Christians don't have to accept the meaning that was assigned to it.

If a religious symbol has a simple design, it's going to show up a lot anyway. Philologos illustrated that with his t-less post. (That must have been pesky to type.) A piece of rubble can be appreciated at a memorial as a "never forget" grim reminder, with or without the extra meaning that people later assign to it.

How can we leap to the conclusion that two girders intersecting at right angles is a religious symbol. Does this "cross" have a steel Jesus hanging from it?

ruveyn

I think that the moment that the t-joint was placed in a Christian chapel, it ceased to be an accidental piece of rubble and became a Christianized piece of iconography.

A memorial at the site is going to be, of necessity, a public memorial. The place is simply too potent to be otherwise. That being the case, the placement of an object which will, rightly or wrongly, be perceived to be a Christian symbol, is problematic. The placement of a star and crescent would be inflammatory, but failing to place it would disserve those victims who were muslim. So the only practical solution is to put no iconography in place.

Christianity does not require the placement of crosses for the practice of its faith. Christians can gather and pray in the absence of a cross.

Incorrect segmentation. Just for future reference.

I think it shouldn't be there. And the Atheist's do have a right to sue. Separation of church and state. A cross wouldn't have been allowed at the WTC pre-9/11 and it shouldn't be at the memorial now.



Not everyone who died that day was Christian. As the article says, it's not only Atheist's who find this offensive.

I've seen those crosses on the side of the road too, and they are usually placed there by the families of those who have died...usually those families are Christian themselves. And the cross isn't the only symbol that can be put on soldier's gravestones. If a soldier who isn't Christian dies, then their families have the right to request the symbol of their faith be put on the stone instead.



We do have the right to practice our own religion, and I'm grateful for that right. Too many people forget that the First Amendment also gives us freedom from religion as well.

They aren't trying to stop the "christians from honoring their dead." They are trying to stop the Christians from putting up a giant religious symbol where one should not be.

And while it would be nice to have symbols of all religions displayed, I don't think that would work. I wonder how long it would take the Christians to get angry if symbols of Judiaism, Islam, Paganism, Hinduism, and so on started showing up. It wouldn't be a month and they'd be suing for the same reasons the Atheists are.

WHY do we need any religious symbolism, this was a tragedy that spanned all creed and culture, how dare the bloody Christians hijack the event for their own purposes.