A group of atheists has filed a lawsuit to stop the display of the World Trade Center cross at a memorial of the 9/11 terror attacks. The "government enshrinement of the cross was an impermissible mingling of church and state," the American Atheists say in a press statement.
These guys are going to a whole lot of trouble and a whole lot of people are going to spit on them in the process, so what's the big deal? Quoth the atheists:
"The WTC cross has become a Christian icon," said Dave Silverman, president of the atheist group. "It has been blessed by so-called holy men and presented as a reminder that their god, who couldn't be bothered to stop the Muslim terrorists or prevent 3,000 people from being killed in his name, cared only enough to bestow upon us some rubble that resembles a cross. It's a truly ridiculous assertion."
Call me a fundie if you must, but that quote doesn't sound like a guy who thinks there is no God. That sounds like a guy who thinks there IS a God and hates him. Like, super duper hates him. And is going to pop a head gasket if he has to look at another cross ever again. (Also sounds like a pencil necked little dickhead, but that's a different post.)
The Phantom Cultist Crasher
10 comments:
I see; you call him a dickhead, but he's the hater. Funny how that works.
The Phantom isn't the one trying to stifle another person's freedom of expression or freedom of religion.
He's just exercising his God-given right to call the person who is a dickhead. Because, y'know, the guy's a dickhead.
Sounds like this guy is another person who's clueless about God:
"...their god, who couldn't be bothered to stop the Muslim terrorists or prevent 3,000 people from being killed in his name..."
I'd go into a rant about how God and Alla are *not* the same, but I'll save that for another day. My gripe here is the all-too-common view of God as some sort of cosmic Santa Claus that's supposed to prevent everything bad from happening EVER.
He's not. He won't. Life is short, painful, and brutal. Believing in God won't change that. Worshiping him won't change it. The idea is to have faith despite the hardships, not because he's coming down the chimney with a bag full of presents.
Brian, you've got a remarkably low threshold for "hater" if you're calling me one.
Maybe you should think about that a little bit.
Hi Alyric. No need to defend your core beliefs against these wankers, I never do. Not worth the trouble, they're just trying to make you feel bad because they HATE your guts.
Just one more more religious nut group, really. Set to ignore, move on.
The Phantom isn't the one trying to stifle another person's freedom of expression or freedom of religion.
Well then, you should read the actual lawsuit…
The atheist group inquired how they could contribute a memorial for all the non-believers killed in the attacks, and they never received a reply. So it looks to me like Christians (and later, Jews) got something memorializing them, but nothing for nonbelievers or other religious groups.
So which group is preventing freedom of expression again?
Nice straw man Brian. The atheists are requiring religious symbols to be removed from the monument so that unbelievers won't have to look at them. They can't feel happy unless all religious symbolism is removed, because its an affront to their unbelief.
Which is pretty much not allowing anybody else the freedom to express themselves, in case five atheist pencil necks might get all upset-ed, right?
If the Xtians were demanding the Mooselim crescent thingie be removed because it wrecks their mojo and they don't want to see it, would you be on their side?
Convince me.
The atheists are requiring religious symbols to be removed from the monument so that unbelievers won't have to look at them.
They are suing to have them removed because the government isn't being neutral; Christians and Jews get memorials, but atheists and anyone else are ignored.
Which is pretty much not allowing anybody else the freedom to express themselves, in case five atheist pencil necks might get all upset-ed, right?
Wrong. Everyone can express themselves on their own private property. But here we're talking about government property.
If the Xtians were demanding the Mooselim crescent thingie be removed because it wrecks their mojo and they don't want to see it, would you be on their side?
What are you babbling about now? You mean the building near ground zero that's also private property?
Yes, Brian. Atheists are suing to prevent religious symbols on a public monument. A very important public monument. At a place were a fuck of a lot of innocent people got killed. In an act of war. One side in which is fighting jihad. Religion.
Hence my point that the atheists in question are fundamentally a -hate- cult, as their only "expression" is to prevent anyone else from expressing themselves.
If they really didn't believe in religion they wouldn't give a crap what was on the memorial.
Restating my previous question, if it was Christians (Xtians is the fashionable term of disrespect I'm told) suing to get the Muslim star-and-crescent removed from a public memorial would you be on the Christian's side?
As they are at the Flight 93 memorial in Pennsylvania. Because the designers created a crescent and star design that faces exactly toward Mecca. Really.
People get upset about that kind of thing, you know?
Looks like Brian took his bat and ball and went home.
Oh dear, you believe that flight 93 memorial nonsense?
Post a Comment