If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   Road crosses ruled unconstitutional. Chicken inconsolable   (cnn.com) divider line 642
    More: Sad  
•       •       •

19674 clicks; posted to Main » on 19 Aug 2010 at 8:15 AM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



642 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all
 
2010-08-19 10:05:42 AM
ShillinTheVillain: DarnoKonrad: Taking something to court isn't always an exercise in malice. There's good reasons, for all faiths and lack thereof, to keep the law on the side of secularism.

I agree. I just think there are real church and state issues worth fighting, and a roadside memorial isn't one of them. The American Atheists in this situation come off as meddling busybodies more than anything. It's completely appropriate for the court to rule the way they did, I just don't see the real offense in this case. It's not a church that put it up, it's a highway patrol association.

I would like a better picture of the crosses in question, though. The pic makes them look small but the article refers to them as being large.


The problem is precedent. When you permit little things like this it's then used as evidence that bigger intrusions should be permitted.

Besides, seeing the pictures it's obvious the court was right to stomp on these.
 
2010-08-19 10:06:03 AM
jagec: EvilEgg: They are also a distraction, drivers do not need more distractions along the roadside.

You're kidding, right? A small cross by the side of the road is a "distraction"?

What's your opinion on fenceposts, or fire hydrants, or parked cars, or coffee shops, or trees, or pedestrians, or stop signs, or streetlights?

If that's all it takes to distract you, then you shouldn't drive. Heaven help you when you come across one of those giant multicolor flashing video billboards (which ARE an annoying distraction, especially at night or in the rain...but they still don't make me crash).


There is one of those bright ones outside Tacoma wa. I literally did almost get in an accident when I came around a curb one dark rainy night and it flashed in my eyes and aggravated a migraine that had been slight until then. I couldn't see for a second. Scary stuff. Didn't crash but felt pissed the next 15 minutes home.
 
2010-08-19 10:07:55 AM
Simple solution:
imagecache6.allposters.com
 
2010-08-19 10:08:01 AM
ace in your face: Evangelical Atheists

Jumbo shrimp
Military intelligence
 
2010-08-19 10:08:07 AM
ace in your face: I don't really understand why you would put "there is no god" rather than just, "you will live on in our memories". I mean, Christians don't put "you believed in god so you will go to heaven unlike the atheists" on their signs... This is what I am talking about, believe what you believe, but don't condemn others. Its not that hard.

How is that possible when one group's statement is a defacto condemnation of another? You're basically saying "Atheists, believe what you want, but don't say it out loud because your mere statement could be considered a condemnation of Christians" while also saying "Christians, beleive what you want and say it, just don't explicitly condemn Atheists."

Stating that there is no god is not a condemnation of those who beleive in a god, it's simply a disagreement. By your logic the mere act of stating that there is a god is a condemnation of those who don't think there is.
 
2010-08-19 10:08:35 AM
ace in your face: I don't really understand why you would put "there is no god" rather than just, "you will live on in our memories". I mean, Christians don't put "you believed in god so you will go to heaven unlike the atheists" on their signs... This is what I am talking about, believe what you believe, but don't condemn others. Its not that hard.

Again, the cross symbol is an explicit indicator. The symbol itself is a Christian message, and a very obvious one. To get on the same level you'd need some message that explicitly conveyed atheism, though since atheism lacks a symbol it would really be impossible to reach the level of recognition of a cross.

If you're suggesting that not mentioning religion on such a memorial would be more tasteful I agree, but it really does nothing for the experiment.
 
2010-08-19 10:08:36 AM
jagec: EvilEgg: They are also a distraction, drivers do not need more distractions along the roadside.

You're kidding, right? A small cross by the side of the road is a "distraction"?


Twelve foot high is a small cross?

I've seen a road backed up for miles because someone was changing a tire. Now that is not the least bit interesting, but people were looking at that instead of the road. So a brand new cross replete with teddy bears and other miscellaneous crap is going to get looked at. Now if you happen to put that in an already dangerous location a couple seconds of distraction is all it takes.
 
2010-08-19 10:10:33 AM
Father_Jack: ShillinTheVillain: ttintagel: There are atheists in Texas?

Yes. And if the lore is to be believed, they're probably bigger than the average atheist.

this is a very strong play.


I'm an atheist in Texas...

Although I'm only 5'6", so, likely not bigger than most.

/just moved here a year ago
//only called big by the ladies
 
2010-08-19 10:11:56 AM
BitwiseShift: Next thing you know the Mormoms will be building a mosque next to the highway patrol building.

ITYM "stakehouse", and it's already there
 
2010-08-19 10:12:35 AM
Did I miss this info: were these memorials erected on the site where the trooper died?
Also, good headline, subby!
One more thing.....a couple of years ago, traffic was being routed around a really bad wreck on a straight stretch of two-lane. As I passed the scene, you could see where the car had skidded off the road, wrapped side-ways around a phone pole, and the pole broke off and landed on the roof of the car. One the front of the car was a novelty plate that said "Jesus is My Co-Pilot". All I could think of was, "Then maybe you should have been in a plane instead of flying in a car!"
 
2010-08-19 10:13:21 AM
ace in your face: jayg22: MyNameIsRobertPaulson: Fark Me To Tears: Have these judges ever visited Arlington National Cemetery?

Have you?

My Grandfather is burried under one of these unconstituional crosses in Nromandy.

My condolences.


i am truly sorry for your lots.
 
2010-08-19 10:13:41 AM
Pocket Ninja: Would you expect to be able to erect a monument in front of the Fritos display?

winner!
 
2010-08-19 10:15:45 AM
Gato Negro: Christmas is a federal holiday. Does that make it unconstitutional?

Sounds like 'endorsing a religion' to me...


Get 100 Christians in a room and I'd bet a pretty large number of them couldn't pass a test on what Christmas is really about. Christmas is a Mall holiday now, about appeasing corporate overlords and spending money, not the birth of the central figure of a religion.

Since the government loves collecting tax revenue, it endorses this.
 
2010-08-19 10:16:00 AM
The Homer Tax: ace in your face: I don't really understand why you would put "there is no god" rather than just, "you will live on in our memories". I mean, Christians don't put "you believed in god so you will go to heaven unlike the atheists" on their signs... This is what I am talking about, believe what you believe, but don't condemn others. Its not that hard.

How is that possible when one group's statement is a defacto condemnation of another? You're basically saying "Atheists, believe what you want, but don't say it out loud because your mere statement could be considered a condemnation of Christians" while also saying "Christians, beleive what you want and say it, just don't explicitly condemn Atheists."

Stating that there is no god is not a condemnation of those who beleive in a god, it's simply a disagreement. By your logic the mere act of stating that there is a god is a condemnation of those who don't think there is.


I am comparing the statements that Christians think a person will "live on in heaven" and an Atheist would believe the person would "live on in their memory". Neither is a condemnation. A condemnation would be "there is no god so he won't be there" or "unlike atheists who will burn in hell he will live in heaven".
 
2010-08-19 10:17:00 AM
EvilEgg:
I've seen a road backed up for miles because someone was changing a tire. Now that is not the least bit interesting, but people were looking at that instead of the road. So a brand new cross replete with teddy bears and other miscellaneous crap is going to get looked at.


I've seen dozens of youtube videos of people driving into stopped highway patrol cars because they were gawking at what the police were doing instead of driving.
 
2010-08-19 10:17:12 AM
How can they claim the crosses are not religious? Why does it have to be crosses? If an officer was killed who was a Pagan, would they put a pentacle up? Or would they get a "non-religious" cross as well? What about Jews and atheists?

No, clearly this is making a statement that the only religion worthy of honoring fallen officers is Christianity, and I guess if you're not a Christian and get killed, well, that's just too bad for you. I know people will throw a tantrum over this, but if they HAVE to honor slain people by the side of the road (why? why not do it in a safer, less filthy place?) they need to pick something that doesn't endorse only one religion.
 
2010-08-19 10:17:18 AM
I'm gonna get drunk and run over a high school kid. A really popular one. Then when his or her friends show up to where I dumped the body so they can put teddy bears and crosses up, I'm gonna kill them. Then I'm gonna wait for their friends to show up....
 
2010-08-19 10:17:25 AM
zarberg: Gato Negro: Christmas is a federal holiday. Does that make it unconstitutional?

Sounds like 'endorsing a religion' to me...

Get 100 Christians in a room and I'd bet a pretty large number of them couldn't pass a test on what Christmas is really about. Christmas is a Mall holiday now, about appeasing corporate overlords and spending money, not the birth of the central figure of a religion.

Since the government loves collecting tax revenue, it endorses this.


More than that, most Christians don't recognize that Easter is the most important holiday in their religion. But most Christians don't know much about Christ anyway.
 
2010-08-19 10:19:45 AM
I don't see how this got a "Sad" tag.
Please explain how pressing the government to halt the endorsement of religion is sad?


"Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law."
-Thomas farking Jefferson
 
2010-08-19 10:20:14 AM
I'm offended by wood on the side of the road that could impale something or someone should I accidentally run off of said road. I don't really care what shape it is.
 
2010-08-19 10:20:16 AM
zarberg: Get 100 Christians in a room and I'd bet a pretty large number of them couldn't pass a test on what Christmas is really about.


If B. Hussein Obama was in the room, then 99 of them would agree that it's the day upon which America traditionally celebrates the birth of Christ.
 
2010-08-19 10:20:21 AM
ace in your face: The Homer Tax: ace in your face: I don't really understand why you would put "there is no god" rather than just, "you will live on in our memories". I mean, Christians don't put "you believed in god so you will go to heaven unlike the atheists" on their signs... This is what I am talking about, believe what you believe, but don't condemn others. Its not that hard.

How is that possible when one group's statement is a defacto condemnation of another? You're basically saying "Atheists, believe what you want, but don't say it out loud because your mere statement could be considered a condemnation of Christians" while also saying "Christians, beleive what you want and say it, just don't explicitly condemn Atheists."

Stating that there is no god is not a condemnation of those who beleive in a god, it's simply a disagreement. By your logic the mere act of stating that there is a god is a condemnation of those who don't think there is.

I am comparing the statements that Christians think a person will "live on in heaven" and an Atheist would believe the person would "live on in their memory". Neither is a condemnation. A condemnation would be "there is no god so he won't be there" or "unlike atheists who will burn in hell he will live in heaven".


Tell me again how belief in magic and the belief that magic is bullshiate are arguments on equal footing. I love how you explain your point there.
 
2010-08-19 10:20:43 AM
Dancin_In_Anson: Rapmaster2000: I have PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY so I don't need the NANNY STATE to remind me to drive properly.

Funny thing is that all of those crosses are put up by private individuals. Ain't that a kick in the head?


On public land. So, if I decide to use private money to build a McDonald's on public land, you'll back me. B'cause that'd be sweet! Make sure you have someone come by to maintain and mow around my McDonald's, too. Don't want it to start looking shabby.
 
2010-08-19 10:21:14 AM
Gato Negro: Rapmaster2000: 20 years ago you rarely saw these things. Now, they're all over the place. What's the deal?


Maybe it's because society needs them now more than ever... (new window)


You're pretty naive, the Houston high-school I went to was a ghetto, it was over-run with drugs, gangs, shootings, and religion. The religion part gave some kids a temporary escape from harsh reality that eventually consumed them, but other than the obsessed kids (and even that falls apart in most cases) they still participated in the madness. Thing is, and this will be hard for you to swallow, religion without real-world grounded reasoning and more important than anything good parents won't help the kids you want to reach. The biggest difference in my high-school by and by far wasn't in whether someone came from a religious background or where even highly religious themselves at all, it was three other factors emotional aptitude, how scholastically engaged they were, work ethic and attitude instilled by the parents.

The same girls that held the daily flag prayers at our school also did coke after school before they went to Wednesday service to teach junior-high kids about their own culture of abstinence, what a joke, the vast majority of the guys and girls in these programs had the same exact weird behavioral 'backlash' effect later on, if they weren't already like those prayer girls and did it simply because it's what they'd always had done, in reality it obviously didn't mean much to them.

The backlash effect is probably the most interesting thing about the claim that religion will solve adolescent problems. Basically the same very disturbing pattern could be said of all my religious friends, at one point they had totally abstinence take on everything, from beer, sex, weed, even to the menial like cursing.

Thing is, they'd all step out of their religious boundaries and find out that most of what they had been told was bullshiat they'd then go way overboard to the other end of the spectrum, totally out of control. Out of the females most make up the majority of the pregnant while in high school group. It was so trite that me and my friends would take bets on just how crazy someone would go when they would 'walk for the first time.' The only thing I could come-up with to explain this was that they hadn't actually developed their own boundaries and reasoning, instead it had been stunted and the colloquial re-naming of this was nativity, or innocence, two words that are simply substitutes for ignorance and stunted EQ forged through censorship.

For the kids who grew up with either stronger parents, or wealthier parents, but still used religion to shelter their child from reality, typically you could count on them making it out of high school and crashing in college. Basically like clock work all my Dallas friends that where rich and or just highly religious went out of control. Forced innocence and especially the intellectually forced innocence is like tying someone to a broken grenade, there's a good chance it'll blow up in their face.
 
2010-08-19 10:21:43 AM
I think everyone needs to RE-READ THE farkING ARTICLE! This isn't about banning crosses that family members put up to "honor" members who died in crashes, this is about the government putting up crosses to "honor" fallen state troopers! This is the government paying for crosses for dead officers (who may or may not have been Christian, wonder how they'd feel about a cross if they were a Jew.) So before everyone starts whining about how now they can't put up a cross for little Jimmy who drove into a tree while texting, this has nothing to do with that. It's only about the government erecting religious images.
 
2010-08-19 10:23:29 AM
Leeds: ace in your face: The Homer Tax: ace in your face: I don't really understand why you would put "there is no god" rather than just, "you will live on in our memories". I mean, Christians don't put "you believed in god so you will go to heaven unlike the atheists" on their signs... This is what I am talking about, believe what you believe, but don't condemn others. Its not that hard.

How is that possible when one group's statement is a defacto condemnation of another? You're basically saying "Atheists, believe what you want, but don't say it out loud because your mere statement could be considered a condemnation of Christians" while also saying "Christians, beleive what you want and say it, just don't explicitly condemn Atheists."

Stating that there is no god is not a condemnation of those who beleive in a god, it's simply a disagreement. By your logic the mere act of stating that there is a god is a condemnation of those who don't think there is.

I am comparing the statements that Christians think a person will "live on in heaven" and an Atheist would believe the person would "live on in their memory". Neither is a condemnation. A condemnation would be "there is no god so he won't be there" or "unlike atheists who will burn in hell he will live in heaven".

Tell me again how belief in magic and the belief that magic is bullshiate are arguments on equal footing. I love how you explain your point there.


I'm ignoring you because you sound like you are a 14 year old.
 
2010-08-19 10:23:36 AM
ace in your face: most Christians don't know much about Christ


Who knows the most?
 
2010-08-19 10:24:48 AM
zamboni: On public land. So, if I decide to use private money to build a McDonald's on public land, you'll back me. B'cause that'd be sweet!

There are McDonald's on public land already.
 
2010-08-19 10:25:11 AM
Attila the Bun: cybrwzrd: Can you please point to Arlington National Cemetary on a map? Also, can you please find Normandy on a map? Are they in the same place? Are they in the same country? Are the on the same Continent?

The graves at Normandy are on American soil.


All of the graves there are not crosses too.

upload.wikimedia.org
 
2010-08-19 10:25:17 AM
ace in your face:
I don't really understand why you would put "there is no god" rather than just, "you will live on in our memories". I mean, Christians don't put "you believed in god so you will go to heaven unlike the atheists" on their signs... This is what I am talking about, believe what you believe, but don't condemn others. Its not that hard.


I'd be fine with Christianity so long as belief in Christ automatically precludes you from all positions in government/education.

Put another way: I don't like certain genres of music but I'm happy for you to listen to them when I'm not around. Christianity needs to be made as harmlessness as taste in music before I'll drop my anti-Christian stance.
 
2010-08-19 10:25:23 AM
Gato Negro: ace in your face: most Christians don't know much about Christ


Who knows the most?


The people that made him up.
 
2010-08-19 10:25:35 AM
ace in your face: I'm ignoring you because you sound like you are a 14 year old.

This from someone who professes to believe in magic.

Now do you see why you religious types need to be constantly reminded how insane you are? Your derpyness needs to be constantly countered with intelligent discourse.
 
2010-08-19 10:26:50 AM
My level of outrage on this depends on if the cross is just arbitrary or in accordance with the fallen troopers beliefs.

I myself am an atheist, but I don't recoil in anger like some sort of vampire at the very sight of a religious symbol, everyone is entitled to their own beliefs, which is why I hate Richard Dawkins every bit as much as I hate Jerry Falwell. Too often my fellow atheists use their views as an excuse to look down on people, to give themselves a sense of self-righteous superiority, ironically the same thing the claim to hate so much about religious fundamentalists.

Anyway tl;dr version: People need to get the fark over themselves
 
2010-08-19 10:27:11 AM
EvilEgg: 1nsanilicious: WTF is with you Athiests? Are the crosses hurtung you, poor little baby? Are you jealous that Athiests don't have a symbol of remembrance so you have to destroy others?

I dont care that Athiesm was crammed down my throat for years in public schools.

I think it's time we viewed Athiesm as a religion and start suing them for shiat.

I wonder what are some thing to sue Atheists for?

Fortunately there atheists are a loose collation of people who don't have much in common. If you get two atheists in a room all you can guarantee is that they both think there isn't enough evidence to presuppose a god.


Don't forget, too, that everyone is an atheist in some ways. Even the most obsessed Jesus freak doesn't believe in anybody elses' gods. It's so funny to me that the Christians can look at another religion ("Zeus? A man who lives in Olympus and had sex with women? That's SO STUPID!") and laugh over how idiotic it is, and yet believes that a ghost knocked up a woman so she could pop out a magic baby who's bloody death and resurrected corpse "saved" people from same hell it's daddy made to punish them, can criticize people. They just can't seem to understand that the way they feel when they look at Islam or something is just the way us non-Christians feel when we look at them.
 
2010-08-19 10:27:18 AM
Gato Negro: Christmas is a federal holiday. Does that make it unconstitutional?

Sounds like 'endorsing a religion' to me...



If you expended any effort in cracking a book of ay kind you could quickly learn what the Supreme court has to say about federal holidays, and christmas displays and what the "Two Reindeer Rule" was.

But I see you'd much rather be offended at phantoms
 
2010-08-19 10:28:05 AM
ace in your face: I am comparing the statements that Christians think a person will "live on in heaven" and an Atheist would believe the person would "live on in their memory". Neither is a condemnation. A condemnation would be "there is no god so he won't be there" or "unlike atheists who will burn in hell he will live in heaven".

That's not what you said, though. I agree with you that adding the second part is crappy. What I was saying was the simple statement that there is no god is a condemnation of no one any more than the statement there is a god is a condemnation of someone.
 
2010-08-19 10:28:30 AM
there their theyre: Isn't Normandy American Cemetery and Memorial US territory? IIRC France conceded the land to the US. Not saying that those crosses are unconstitutional or even that the constitution applies there.

i believe normady has star-of-david markers for the jewish soldiers, etc.. the shape of the marker is based on the faith of the soldier, which makes it constitutional.

proper graveyards are accounted more leeway on this issue - and it's really easy to deal with in graveyards: make the marker associated with the faith of the individual soldier. Then it is not the government endorsing any religion, it is merely the government respecting that soldier.

/angry atheist
//court made the right decision in this case
 
2010-08-19 10:28:56 AM
The Homer Tax: jayg22: My Grandfather is burried under one of these unconstituional crosses in Nromandy.

There's no such thing as an "Unconstitutional Cross in Normandy," as the Constitution has no jurisdiction in France.

In America, however, where the Constitution does have power, is where Arlington National Cemetery is located. How many memorial markers are crosses there?


Actually, the American cemetery at Normandy is a US Territory, so you're completely wrong. Also, nearly 98% of the tombstones at Arlington have crosses engraved on them. Many of those crosses are different, as they represent the different branches of Christianity, but they're there - everywhere.

farm4.static.flickr.com

There are also several large to gigantic crosses all over the cemetery that are not used as personal marks on an individual tombstone:

www.arlingtoncemetery.net

In other words, you might want to back off the smarmy know-it-all attitude before someone makes you look like a tool...
 
2010-08-19 10:28:58 AM
Joce678: ace in your face:
I don't really understand why you would put "there is no god" rather than just, "you will live on in our memories". I mean, Christians don't put "you believed in god so you will go to heaven unlike the atheists" on their signs... This is what I am talking about, believe what you believe, but don't condemn others. Its not that hard.

I'd be fine with Christianity so long as belief in Christ automatically precludes you from all positions in government/education.

Put another way: I don't like certain genres of music but I'm happy for you to listen to them when I'm not around. Christianity needs to be made as harmlessness as taste in music before I'll drop my anti-Christian stance.


So you don't believe in religious freedom or tolerance. Good for you.


Leeds: ace in your face: I'm ignoring you because you sound like you are a 14 year old.

This from someone who professes to believe in magic.

Now do you see why you religious types need to be constantly reminded how insane you are? Your derpyness needs to be constantly countered with intelligent discourse.


I haven't said anything about my personal beliefs on religion other than I don't think people should proselytize their personal beliefs about religion. You are the Wharrrgarble in this conversation. Now stop pretending you are sick and head back to school.
 
2010-08-19 10:29:11 AM
ITT: ace in your face gets straight embarrassed by reason over.. and over... and over.. and over again.
 
2010-08-19 10:29:24 AM
R.A.Danny: zamboni: On public land. So, if I decide to use private money to build a McDonald's on public land, you'll back me. B'cause that'd be sweet!

There are McDonald's on public land already.


Cool, and they don't have to pay anything to put them there? Leases, fees, etc?
 
2010-08-19 10:30:00 AM
jagec: You're kidding, right? A small cross by the side of the road is a "distraction"?

"A small cross"? And you have the stones to ask if he's kidding?

www.ccstsp.org

seattletimes.nwsource.com

urngarden.com

www.ctpost.com

farm4.static.flickr.com

If that's all it takes to distract you, then you shouldn't drive.

They don't distract me, because I ignore them. But they sure as shiat are distractions, and they need to be removed.
 
2010-08-19 10:31:05 AM
zarberg: Gato Negro: Christmas is a federal holiday. Does that make it unconstitutional?

Sounds like 'endorsing a religion' to me...

Get 100 Christians in a room and I'd bet a pretty large number of them couldn't pass a test on what Christmas is really about. Christmas is a Mall holiday now, about appeasing corporate overlords and spending money, not the birth of the central figure of a religion.

Since the government loves collecting tax revenue, it endorses this.


And half of them probably couldn't pass a test on what the holiday was like before the Christians came along and shoehorned their story into it, either.
 
2010-08-19 10:32:02 AM
Gato Negro: zarberg: Get 100 Christians in a room and I'd bet a pretty large number of them couldn't pass a test on what Christmas is really about.


If B. Hussein Obama was in the room, then 99 of them would agree that it's the day upon which America traditionally celebrates the birth of Christ.


See, this is why I have you painted in wingbat red ... I make a perfectly good point about the sad state of the Christian religion and you have to go and turn it into a Glenn Beckian statement on our president.

Thanks for the entertainment!
 
2010-08-19 10:32:48 AM
ace in your face: jagec: EvilEgg: They are also a distraction, drivers do not need more distractions along the roadside.

You're kidding, right? A small cross by the side of the road is a "distraction"?

What's your opinion on fenceposts, or fire hydrants, or parked cars, or coffee shops, or trees, or pedestrians, or stop signs, or streetlights?

If that's all it takes to distract you, then you shouldn't drive. Heaven help you when you come across one of those giant multicolor flashing video billboards (which ARE an annoying distraction, especially at night or in the rain...but they still don't make me crash).

There is one of those bright ones outside Tacoma wa. I literally did almost get in an accident when I came around a curb one dark rainy night and it flashed in my eyes and aggravated a migraine that had been slight until then. I couldn't see for a second. Scary stuff. Didn't crash but felt pissed the next 15 minutes home.


If a roadside cross is enough to trigger a migraine bad enough that you almost crashed...maybe you should not drive a car.
 
2010-08-19 10:32:57 AM
DarnoKonrad: Gato Negro: Christmas is a federal holiday. Does that make it unconstitutional?

Sounds like 'endorsing a religion' to me...

It's also a secular holiday, as we're often reminded around December when the Right floods the media with accusations of "taking Christ out of Christmas".

If you want secularize the cross as well, you're going to get even more backlash from Christians.

Separation of church and state is a two way street -- because when you bring it into the public domain, the public can and will change the meaning -- much to your clear resentment.


My first Amendment Professor made that same argument: That first amendment exists as much to protect the State from religion as it does to protect religion from the state.

He also often asked a question and I think Christians really ought to ponder: When you argue that Creche scenes or crosses are not religious but purely "secular" displays, aren't you cheapening your most potent iconography?

In the rush to try to sneak around the law, and have religious displays on public property, aren't these would be evanglists actually desacrilizing their most potent religious symbols?
 
2010-08-19 10:34:26 AM
1nsanilicious: WTF is with you Athiests? Are the crosses hurtung you, poor little baby? Are you jealous that Athiests don't have a symbol of remembrance so you have to destroy others?

I dont care that Athiesm was crammed down my throat for years in public schools.

I think it's time we viewed Athiesm as a religion and start suing them for shiat.

I wonder what are some thing to sue Atheists for?


points deducted for 'crammed'
2/10
 
2010-08-19 10:34:39 AM
Ctrl-Alt-Del: jagec: You're kidding, right? A small cross by the side of the road is a "distraction"?

"A small cross"? And you have the stones to ask if he's kidding?

If that's all it takes to distract you, then you shouldn't drive.

They don't distract me, because I ignore them. But they sure as shiat are distractions, and they need to be removed.


Well, to be honest, I am pretty easily distracted and still I don't see those causing me to wreck anytime soon. On the other hand they are put their by people who wish to draw attention to something, they're distractions by their own very nature.
 
2010-08-19 10:34:42 AM
Ctrl-Alt-Del: jagec: You're kidding, right? A small cross by the side of the road is a "distraction"?

"A small cross"? And you have the stones to ask if he's kidding?


Bah, I suck for not reading the article first.

The roadside crap discussed in this particular article have nothing to do with the idiotic, garish roadside memorials I was talking about. I will now slink away in shame and embarrassment.
 
2010-08-19 10:35:29 AM
Rapmaster2000: Please. You just don't like your tired talking points turned against you.

What talking points? That private individuals should be able to put up memorials for people lost in traffic accidents? The same 'talking point that you somehow try to link to the Rapmaster2000: NANNY STATE

I'll stick with my contention that you really suck at Fark.
 
Displayed 50 of 642 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report