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)   NY state court says that 9/11 Cross may be allowed in the memorial's museum. Naturally, some people have a problem with this   (cnn.com) divider line 299
    More: Obvious, World Trade Center Cross, Judges' Rules, World Trade Center, A New York, American Atheists, Franciscans, museums  
•       •       •

6056 clicks; posted to Main » on 30 Mar 2013 at 5:36 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



299 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-03-30 02:53:31 PM
Sounds like someone has confused secularism with anti-theism.
 
2013-03-30 03:24:29 PM
it's just one of thousands of T-braces used in the construction of that building.
 
2013-03-30 03:41:47 PM
Pick your battles, people.  This just isn't one worth fighting, on either side really.  Creationism being taught in science class?  BIG problem there.  This?  Blech, who cares?
 
2013-03-30 03:45:26 PM

nekom: Pick your battles, people.  This just isn't one worth fighting, on either side really.  Creationism being taught in science class?  BIG problem there.  This?  Blech, who cares?


This!  I want to tattoo this on some of these evangelical atheists eyelids.  I don't give a fark if they want to plant a sacred grove and worship trees at the memorial, let the believers have their toys.  Just keep them out of my classrooms and my government.  (we have some work to do on this, I know)
 
2013-03-30 04:08:08 PM
Jesus Christ, atheists can be assholes.
 
2013-03-30 04:14:02 PM
I bet the heat and kinetic energy of the collapse left some mangled steel beams strewn about like a spaghetti monster.
 
2013-03-30 04:16:37 PM

Mugato: Jesus Christ, atheists can be assholes.


Any person can be an asshole.

Christians can be assholes.

Muslims can be assholes.

Hindus can be assholes.

Drinkers can be assholes.

Teetotalers can be assholes.

Men can be assholes.

Women can be assholes.

Hell, you don't even need to be human to be an asshole.  I know some ducks who are complete (metaphorical) jackasses.
 
2013-03-30 04:22:54 PM

Voiceofreason01: Sounds like someone has confused secularism with anti-theism.


No kidding.
 
2013-03-30 04:43:32 PM
Atheist asshole trifecta in play.

Good job, assholes.
 
2013-03-30 04:47:28 PM

violentsalvation: I bet the heat and kinetic energy of the collapse left some mangled steel beams strewn about like a spaghetti monster.


The problem with pastafarianism is that it doesn't have its own city. No Mecca, Jerusalem, Vatican, or Salt Lake City. You have to have a city if you want to be a legitimate religion.
 
2013-03-30 04:50:59 PM
img.photobucket.com
I'm an atheist and I don't even give a f*ck.
 
2013-03-30 05:01:09 PM

Walker: [img.photobucket.com image 400x300]
I'm an atheist and I don't even give a f*ck.


Amen!

Seems silly to attach any significance whatsoever to a cross that survived the 9/11 collapse of two buildings made out of crosses... but hey... seems silly to get worked up enough to try to exclude it from a 9/11 museum.
 
2013-03-30 05:03:27 PM
FTA: "September 11 "affected all Americans, not just Christians," Silverman continued. "We will not sit and let the 500 atheists who died on 9/11 go unnoticed."


How does Silverman know how many atheists died on 9/11?

Were they registered atheists?
 
2013-03-30 05:04:08 PM
Its people like you that give people like me a bad name.

I consider myself agnostic. I have been told that I am closer to atheist beliefs.

Lets take a look at this shall we?

Are they forcing you to pray at the base of the cross? Are they forcing you to admit the existence of God? Are they even using verses from the bible?

No.

This is something that gave people cause for relief in a very troubled time. They are not forcing you to worship their God. All they are asking is that something of this historical significance is saved for future generations to come and understand what happened.
 
2013-03-30 05:05:24 PM

violentsalvation: I bet the heat and kinetic energy of the collapse left some mangled steel beams strewn about like a spaghetti monster.



Yeah, but good luck getting that to fly.
 
2013-03-30 05:14:53 PM
As retarded as this is, it's still way less retarded than giving any significance whatsoever to two beams that happened to end up attached to each other in a perpendicular orientation.
 
2013-03-30 05:40:07 PM
Maybe something Islamic instead?
 
2013-03-30 05:41:11 PM
Silly athiests, it's almost as though they think they're persecuted.  What, do they want to be jewish or something?
 
2013-03-30 05:42:58 PM
Yes, clearly, what's needed here is more religion.
 
2013-03-30 05:43:58 PM
"September 11 "affected all Americans, not just Christians," Silverman continued. "We will not sit and let the 500 atheists who died on 9/11 go unnoticed."

Because to notice one group is to un-notice, or anti-notice if you will, all other groups.
 
2013-03-30 05:48:37 PM

ecmoRandomNumbers: violentsalvation: I bet the heat and kinetic energy of the collapse left some mangled steel beams strewn about like a spaghetti monster.

The problem with pastafarianism is that it doesn't have its own city. No Mecca, Jerusalem, Vatican, or Salt Lake City. You have to have a city if you want to be a legitimate religion.


Using that criteria Scientology is a legitimate religion.  They (mostly) own downtown Clearwater.
 
2013-03-30 05:49:49 PM
oh for..

www.patentspostgrant.com
 
2013-03-30 05:49:58 PM
God:

Did not prevent the attacks, resulting deaths, and resulting war(s), and deaths.

Did make his symbol appear in the rubble.
 
2013-03-30 05:50:13 PM

Amos Quito: FTA: "September 11 "affected all Americans, not just Christians," Silverman continued. "We will not sit and let the 500 atheists who died on 9/11 go unnoticed."


........ um, isn't that what the memorial museum is for?
 
2013-03-30 05:50:59 PM

lokis_mentor: ecmoRandomNumbers: violentsalvation: I bet the heat and kinetic energy of the collapse left some mangled steel beams strewn about like a spaghetti monster.

The problem with pastafarianism is that it doesn't have its own city. No Mecca, Jerusalem, Vatican, or Salt Lake City. You have to have a city if you want to be a legitimate religion.

Using that criteria Scientology is a legitimate religion.  They (mostly) own downtown Clearwater.


But the Jews own everything, so they are the MOST legitimate.
 
2013-03-30 05:51:13 PM
Giant "who cares?"
At the end of the day, that "cross" was important to a lot of people, and as such, belongs in the museum as it commemorates not only 9/11, but the turmoil afterwards.
If a bunch of beams fell and arranged themselves into a portrait of Billy Corgan, and for whatever reason a bunch of people found solace in it, it isn't my place to say it doesn't belong at the 9/11 memorial simply because I, and a few victims, farking hated Smashing Pumpkins.

You guys can go ahead and use that allegory the next time you talk about this. I know it's succinct and poignant.
 
2013-03-30 05:52:54 PM
I don't see it as an asshole move to try to block the inclusion of a christian symbol from the museum, but I do see the attempt at inclusion as an asshole move.
 
2013-03-30 05:53:00 PM

nekom: Pick your battles, people.  This just isn't one worth fighting, on either side really.  Creationism being taught in science class?  BIG problem there.  This?  Blech, who cares?


"Not worth fighting"? There is nothing to fight. It's-

Voiceofreason01: Sounds like someone has confused secularism with anti-theism.


-what he said.

I'm as atheistically atheisty as they come, but American Atheists are wrong on this.

Louisiana_Sitar_Club: "September 11 "affected all Americans, not just Christians," Silverman continued. "We will not sit and let the 500 atheists who died on 9/11 go unnoticed."

Because to notice one group is to un-notice, or anti-notice if you will, all other groups.


-and this.
 
2013-03-30 05:53:40 PM
The concept of seperation of church and state does not at all obligate the government to conduct itself as if religion does not exist or to deny those who are religous a public voice.  On the other hand, modern-day chirstianity is infintely more about icon worship and being able to spout the correct dogma rather than being a living example of love and acceptance, so they aren't exactly endearing themselves to anyone with that.
 
2013-03-30 05:54:04 PM
I agree - atheists are assholes.

/a lot of them anyway
//happy Easter you bastards!
 
2013-03-30 05:55:18 PM
arguing that the "government enshrinement of the cross" was an impermissible mingling of church and state.

The government has been enshrining religious art and symbols in Federally run museums for as long as they've existed. Maybe the National Gallery of Art should hide its Italian collection from the eyes of the easily offended.

This guy really needs to pick his battles better. This just makes his organization look like dicks. Also, how does he know how many atheists died in the towers?
 
2013-03-30 05:57:08 PM
Also, statistically speaking, what's amazing isn't that they pulled cross-shaped steel beams from the WTC rubble; what's amazing is that they only pulled out one.
 
2013-03-30 05:57:35 PM

Smeggy Smurf: Silly athiests, it's almost as though they think they're persecuted.  What, do they want to be jewish or something?


According to The Jewish Week, Dave Silverman (FTA) is both Jewish and atheist.


/I wonder where he's celebrating Passover?
 
2013-03-30 05:58:01 PM
I think this guy must have been sitting around one day saying, "I think I should be an atheist, but I don't know how." Then he flipped the channel to Fox News.
 
2013-03-30 06:00:09 PM
3000+ people dead and a cross gets jabbed on top of the rubble?

God's just trolling us at this point.

/3000+ folks escaping certain death would have been a REAL miracle.
//Just sayin'
 
2013-03-30 06:00:48 PM
Federal Judge Deborah Batts of the Southern District of New York ruled Thursday that display of the beams is permissible because they bear historical importance.

I do not disagree with the display, and as long as "historical importance" is meant to mean "significance tied to the content of the museum" this is acceptable. I often hear "historical importance" or some such in religious cases when what is meant is "tradition", as in something which should be unacceptable has been done for so long as to somehow become acceptable. This is unlikely to be the case, and I think this tells a similar story as any other religious iconography in museums. Still, cannot fault the American Atheists for undertaking this because each case helps better establish the lines. Considering the sheer amount of First Amendment violations which are undertaken each year and have continued for decades without opposition, such legal cases require some protracted fighting.

"We are confident that we will eventually win this case and that cross will be removed, or atheists will be allowed to have our own symbol in there," he said.

Wonder what this symbol would be? I know American Atheists have a symbol, but I do not know what connection this would have to the events of September 11th. He appears to be missing the point.
 
2013-03-30 06:01:07 PM

eraser8: Mugato: Jesus Christ, atheists can be assholes.

Any person can be an asshole.

Christians can be assholes.

Muslims can be assholes.

Hindus can be assholes.

Drinkers can be assholes.

Teetotalers can be assholes.

Men can be assholes.

Women can be assholes.

Hell, you don't even need to be human to be an asshole.  I know some ducks who are complete (metaphorical) jackasses.


Yeah, we won't even get started on geese. Those bastards wrote the book.
 
2013-03-30 06:01:50 PM
This makes me embarrassed to be an atheist. We're not all like that, trust me. I think it's a beautiful symbol of 9/11 and should absolutely be included.
 
2013-03-30 06:05:52 PM

ecmoRandomNumbers: violentsalvation: I bet the heat and kinetic energy of the collapse left some mangled steel beams strewn about like a spaghetti monster.

The problem with pastafarianism is that it doesn't have its own city. No Mecca, Jerusalem, Vatican, or Salt Lake City. You have to have a city if you want to be a legitimate religion.


I thought FSM was based out of Tennessee. They did erect a statue outside a courthouse.
 
2013-03-30 06:07:07 PM

prgrmr: Also, statistically speaking, what's amazing isn't that they pulled cross-shaped steel beams from the WTC rubble; what's amazing is that they only pulled out one.


It's kinda like picking a Christmas tree.  You gotta walk all around it, shake it, pound it on the ground a few times... but you only have time to do all that with a few, and you only need one to take home.
 
2013-03-30 06:07:31 PM

ecmoRandomNumbers: violentsalvation: I bet the heat and kinetic energy of the collapse left some mangled steel beams strewn about like a spaghetti monster.

The problem with pastafarianism is that it doesn't have its own city. No Mecca, Jerusalem, Vatican, or Salt Lake City. You have to have a city if you want to be a legitimate religion.


Voiceofreason01: Sounds like someone has confused secularism with anti-theism.


They can take Detroit. Not only would no one notice, no one would care if they did.
 
2013-03-30 06:08:22 PM

hornblowerfan: This makes me embarrassed to be an atheist. We're not all like that, trust me. I think it's a beautiful symbol of 9/11 and should absolutely be included.


Why be embarrassed? This asshat has nothing to do with you.

I'm pissed that he's claiming to speak for me.
 
2013-03-30 06:10:27 PM
"We are confident that we will eventually win this case and that cross will be removed, or atheists will be allowed to have our own symbol in there," he said.

Why wasn't this the main goal in the first place?  It's an historical artifact and I have no problem with it being displayed in the museum so long as they're not denying all other symbols.
 
2013-03-30 06:10:34 PM
mail it to George W as a souvenir of his Poland.
 
2013-03-30 06:11:10 PM
I think it's entirely appropriate to include the cross of girders in the 9/11 museum. It's a stellar example of misguided religious thinking which reinforces unfounded superstition at the expense of rational thought.

The reason a cross was found in the wreckage at Ground Zero is because hundreds of thousands of such intersecting girders were used in the towers' construction. Structures are built at 90-degree angles because putting load-bearing structures perpendicular to the force of gravity is the strongest and most efficient method of construction.

It would have been a miracle if search teams hadn't found any cross-like shapes in the wreckage at Ground Zero.

People who find meaning in this artifact do so because they're attempting to retrofit the laws of physics into their religious belief systems. This nonsensical demand that the entire world conform to the religious preferences of some is what led to the attacks on the twin towers in the first place.

So it's a perfect metaphor for why the tragedy happened, and as long as there are people who see the welded intersection of two structural beams and regard it as a personal sign from God, there will be people willing to commit future 9/11s.
 
2013-03-30 06:11:39 PM
If anyone wants to know what a militant atheist looks like, it's the ones who are so worked up they care about this shiat.
 
2013-03-30 06:11:43 PM

Ennuipoet: evangelical atheists


What really annoys me is that they're completely full of nothing.
 
2013-03-30 06:16:31 PM
It's only a shape.

/agnostic, because atheism is too much like having a belief.
 
2013-03-30 06:16:43 PM

Vangor: Still, cannot fault the American Atheists for undertaking this because each case helps better establish the lines. Considering the sheer amount of First Amendment violations which are undertaken each year and have continued for decades without opposition, such legal cases require some protracted fighting.


I disagree. Picking the wrong battles absolutely can end up doing more harm to your cause than good. It's why half the crap the NAACP does infuriates me.
 
2013-03-30 06:19:30 PM
As a New York atheist, I echo the thoughts of most in this thread in saying this is an asinine lawsuit.  As for getting a symbol of our own at the WTC, I'd say the fountains should be enough.  Watching the water pour off into an empty black hole fills the viewer with a profound sense of nothingness-- precisely what the religiously motivated 9/11 attacks accomplished.  It's a thousand times more powerful than another "IMAGINE" wreath could ever be.
 
2013-03-30 06:19:32 PM
1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-03-30 06:19:40 PM

zamboni: Walker: [img.photobucket.com image 400x300]
I'm an atheist and I don't even give a f*ck.

Amen!

Seems silly to attach any significance whatsoever to a cross that survived the 9/11 collapse of two buildings made out of crosses... but hey... seems silly to get worked up enough to try to exclude it from a 9/11 museum.


Some atheists are like some gun folk: there is no middle ground, there are no sensible options, battle must be joined At All Costs. Slippery slope and all that. I'm a little more sympathetic to the gun argument, seeing a steady ratcheting effect toward guns with 7 bullets, 6 ...5...4...3...2...1 then no bullets. But no background checks? That's a tough case to make, IMO.
 
2013-03-30 06:21:36 PM

wiredroach: I think it's entirely appropriate to include the cross of girders in the 9/11 museum. It's a stellar example of misguided religious thinking which reinforces unfounded superstition at the expense of rational thought.

The reason a cross was found in the wreckage at Ground Zero is because hundreds of thousands of such intersecting girders were used in the towers' construction. Structures are built at 90-degree angles because putting load-bearing structures perpendicular to the force of gravity is the strongest and most efficient method of construction.

It would have been a miracle if search teams hadn't found any cross-like shapes in the wreckage at Ground Zero.

People who find meaning in this artifact do so because they're attempting to retrofit the laws of physics into their religious belief systems. This nonsensical demand that the entire world conform to the religious preferences of some is what led to the attacks on the twin towers in the first place.

So it's a perfect metaphor for why the tragedy happened, and as long as there are people who see the welded intersection of two structural beams and regard it as a personal sign from God, there will be people willing to commit future 9/11s.


This.

If your god loved you so much, why did he allow infidels to do this? He can say "I'm here" by leaving one part of the structure almost intact, but lets thousands of believers die a horrible, fiery death.

Or maybe it's a sign of a false god...
 
2013-03-30 06:21:54 PM

redmid17: ecmoRandomNumbers: violentsalvation: I bet the heat and kinetic energy of the collapse left some mangled steel beams strewn about like a spaghetti monster.

The problem with pastafarianism is that it doesn't have its own city. No Mecca, Jerusalem, Vatican, or Salt Lake City. You have to have a city if you want to be a legitimate religion.

Voiceofreason01: Sounds like someone has confused secularism with anti-theism.

They can take Detroit. Not only would no one notice, no one would care if they did.


Hell. Canada took Detroit 200 years ago and gave it back.
 
2013-03-30 06:23:27 PM
2.bp.blogspot.com

Let the cross stand as a monument to the question every Jesus-worshiper avoids: Where was your omnipotent, all-powerful, all-loving Jesus when 3,000 people were murdered?
 
2013-03-30 06:26:05 PM

YoOjo: It's only a shape.

/agnostic, because atheism is too much like having a belief.


*Heavy sigh*

Whatever floats your boat.

/Atheist, because I don't believe.
 
2013-03-30 06:29:42 PM

Ego edo infantia cattus: YoOjo: It's only a shape.

/agnostic, because atheism is too much like having a belief.

*Heavy sigh*

Whatever floats your boat.

/Atheist, because I don't believe.


there's a difference between gnostic athiesm and agnostic athiesm
 
2013-03-30 06:31:34 PM
LEST WE FORGET!
cdn.buzznet.com
 
2013-03-30 06:32:09 PM

Ego edo infantia cattus: YoOjo: It's only a shape.

/agnostic, because atheism is too much like having a belief.

*Heavy sigh*

Whatever floats your boat.

/Atheist, because I don't believe.


I used to think/believe I was atheist, then I heard Tig Notaro (or someone talking to her) say that it infers a belief that there definitely isn't anything to believe in and they identified as agnostic instead.
As I really don't care or want to know about anything spiritual I thought that maybe I was agnostic too.
Then I mentioned it on Fark because I remembered something about it for some reason. But I soon stopped caring again and moved onto better things to think about.
 
2013-03-30 06:32:50 PM
Atheist or no, the purpose of the museum is to commemorate what happened, and what happened in that crisis was that many people turned to God for answers, the cross, a symbol not created by the state for that, was the symbol that many turned to when turning to God. Not believing in God isn't a rational reason for editing history to make it seem as though those who were there, or the families of those who were there, did not believe in God. History is what it is, not what we want it to be. Having the 9/11 cross in a museum is no more of an endorsement of religion than having whips and chains in a museum is an endorsement of slavery.

History is an unbalanced, unfair biatch... "correcting" it to be more inclusive, less abrasive, more or less bad than it was is a disservice to everyone, regardless of their perspective with respect to that history.
 
2013-03-30 06:35:33 PM

YoOjo: It's only a shape.

/agnostic, because atheism is too much like having a belief.


/apathetic, because agnosticism is too much like giving a fark.
 
2013-03-30 06:37:44 PM

REO-Weedwagon: Let the cross stand as a monument to the question every Jesus-worshiper avoids: Where was your omnipotent, all-powerful, all-loving Jesus when 3,000 people were murdered?


I always thought this was a silly argument. God supposedly gave man free will. Free will can be a dangerous thing. I don't recall God saying that he will save people from death on earth, only that of you believe in him that you will be saved and go to heaven. If you believe that sort of thing.

/not particularly religious
 
2013-03-30 06:38:27 PM

REO-Weedwagon: [2.bp.blogspot.com image 344x400]

Let the cross stand as a monument to the question every Jesus-worshiper avoids: Where was your omnipotent, all-powerful, all-loving Jesus when 3,000 people were murdered?


F*CK YES!

Where was your God over the last century when over a hundred million people were murdered by various so-called governments?
 
2013-03-30 06:39:09 PM
"The World Trade Center cross, two intersecting steel beams that held up when the twin towers collapsed on September 11, 2001, is seen as iconic to some."

So, you mean to tell me that American Atheists (and I'm agnostic, mind you) are throwing their hands in the air over what's to some the architectural equivalent of french toast Jesus, despite the fact that they're remnants of 9/11? That's an answer to a nonexistent problem if I've ever read one.
 
2013-03-30 06:39:46 PM

YoOjo: /agnostic, because atheism is too much like having a belief.


I'm an atheist and an agnostic.  My agnosticism doesn't change the fact that I do not believe in a god or gods.  That is, it doesn't change the fact that I'm an atheist.

For example, I'm also agnostic with respect to unicorns.  That doesn't mean that I'm on the fence as to whether unicorns exist. It just means that I can't be entirely, beyond doubt certain that they don't exist somewhere in the Universe. But, I'm certainly "atheist" (not quite the right word, I'll admit) in that I do not believe that unicorns are real.

As a wise man said, agnosticism is not some middle ground between "believing X" and "believing not X."

Agnosticism is about knowledge.  It's perfectly compatible with atheism or theism or with any other belief you might have.
 
2013-03-30 06:41:51 PM

skozlaw: Ennuipoet: evangelical atheists

What really annoys me is that they're completely full of nothing.


Hey.... pointless stupid rage and pathological self importance are something.

Religion is the idea that love is alive.
Atheism is the idea that love is a lie.

(Expect the crazy-hate to start in 3...2...)
 
2013-03-30 06:43:34 PM
"We are confident that we will eventually win this case and that cross will be removed, or atheists will be allowed to have our own symbol in there," he said.

Atheists don't have symbols. FSM doesn't count.
 
2013-03-30 06:45:23 PM
Believer or not, atheist or not, everyone remembers the stupid cross. Yes, it's stupid as hell (what are the odds that in a 110-story building, two beams would intersect at a right angle??!)

However, retarded as it is, it was totally iconic of that very important time in our history. At such, it has major cultural relevance, and therefore, it belongs in the goddamn museum.

NEXT.
 
2013-03-30 06:45:51 PM
Atheism is a Religion.
 
2013-03-30 06:47:21 PM

eraser8: Mugato: Jesus Christ, atheists can be assholes.

Any person can be an asshole.

Christians can be assholes.

Muslims can be assholes.

Hindus can be assholes.

Drinkers can be assholes.

Teetotalers can be assholes.

Men can be assholes.

Women can be assholes.

Hell, you don't even need to be human to be an asshole.  I know some ducks who are complete (metaphorical) jackasses.


I'd be a lot more willing to identify myself as one of you, Atheists, if you weren't such dicks. Even your defense is not, "atheists aren't dicks," it's, "christians are too."

Guess what? You're still dicks.
 
2013-03-30 06:47:35 PM

REO-Weedwagon: [2.bp.blogspot.com image 344x400]

Let the cross stand as a monument to the question every Jesus-worshiper avoids: Where was your omnipotent, all-powerful, all-loving Jesus when 3,000 people were murdered?


Checking ID and stamping hands for the bar upstairs.
 
2013-03-30 06:47:37 PM
Maybe the cross was God's "I was here", when his divine plan killed all those people.
 
2013-03-30 06:55:06 PM

The Bestest: Vangor: Still, cannot fault the American Atheists for undertaking this because each case helps better establish the lines. Considering the sheer amount of First Amendment violations which are undertaken each year and have continued for decades without opposition, such legal cases require some protracted fighting.

I disagree. Picking the wrong battles absolutely can end up doing more harm to your cause than good. It's why half the crap the NAACP does infuriates me.


I do not understand why legal battles such as this would infuriate anyone. The NAACP and AA are not elected officials and are working in a transparent manner within the scope of current laws to establish legal interpretation. What should infuriate everyone is when elected officials attempt to subvert the system away from public views to impose religious belief or lack of belief on others.

Further, the battle of minds is always a slow one which requires personal experience to change. This will not make anyone dislike atheists more, simply support a previously held notion. Time will sway minds as more and more people meet more and more people who are more and more open to being identified as atheists, and the only way to slow this is for politicians and officials to slide in establishments.
 
2013-03-30 06:55:13 PM

flup: Believer or not, atheist or not, everyone remembers the stupid cross. Yes, it's stupid as hell (what are the odds that in a 110-story building, two beams would intersect at a right angle??!)

However, retarded as it is, it was totally iconic of that very important time in our history. At such, it has major cultural relevance, and therefore, it belongs in the goddamn museum.

NEXT.


Quit being rational.  This is where the butthurt come to complain.

Igor Jakovsky: REO-Weedwagon: Let the cross stand as a monument to the question every Jesus-worshiper avoids: Where was your omnipotent, all-powerful, all-loving Jesus when 3,000 people were murdered?

I always thought this was a silly argument. God supposedly gave man free will. Free will can be a dangerous thing. I don't recall God saying that he will save people from death on earth, only that of you believe in him that you will be saved and go to heaven. If you believe that sort of thing.

/not particularly religious


It really is a stupid argument made by the weak-minded.  It's like a bumper sticker - if you believe what you're expressing, you think it'll show someone you're clever.  It doesn't.
 
2013-03-30 06:55:37 PM

letrole: Atheism is a Religion.


Man... took you long enough.

I was beginning to think that you took the weekend off... like jesus.
 
2013-03-30 06:58:18 PM
As an Atheist Orthodox who saw the towers fall and worked as a translator for families who lost loved ones that day, I must say fark some of my fellow atheists!  Atheism doesn't mean against religion, a-holes!  People are just as free to worship as I am to not do so.  To me, that cross represents the spirit of the city and those working at ground zero.  And although I don't believe in any deities  if you were to put that cross right outside my door, I would make sure to place a flower by its feet every time I walked by it.
 
2013-03-30 06:59:37 PM

eraser8: I know some ducks who are complete (metaphorical) jackasses.


Well, ducks are the first non-human animal that was documented to perform gang rape.

As far as the article, I'm an atheist, but the cross is part of the story.  It was well documented at the time, and is part of the history of 9/11.  I see no problem with it being in the museum.
 
2013-03-30 07:01:22 PM
God really stepped up that day. Without that cross, 9/11 would have been a real tragedy.
 
2013-03-30 07:02:32 PM

Vangor: I do not understand why legal battles such as this would infuriate anyone.


..because to a certain extent, the laws we get are a result of popular opinion. If you undermine your own image by chasing windmills, people are less sympathetic to your cause when you have to defend something worthwhile, yet unpopular. A judge may side with you today, but if his ruling comes to a chorus of boos, tomorrow a congressman proposes a law that reverses it.
 
2013-03-30 07:04:35 PM
I'm an atheist and this doesn't bother me. Many historical works of art have come from religious artifice. Does Silverman think the Rennaissance paintings of the Madonna with Jesus don't belong in a museum?
 
2013-03-30 07:05:55 PM

flup: I'd be a lot more willing to identify myself as one of you, Atheists, if you weren't such dicks.


And, maybe people would be more willing to identify as Color blind/Jewish/Lesbian/of the Austrian economic school if they weren't such dicks.

flup: Even your defense is not, "atheists aren't dicks," it's, "christians are too."


My post wasn't a "defense" of anyone.

I was just pointing out the ridiculousness of saying, "atheists can be assholes ."

That is, there's no point in that claim; it conveys nothing concrete.  The term "atheists" could have been swapped out for literally any other group and the statement would be just as accurate.
 
2013-03-30 07:06:17 PM
I'm an atheist, and I say let the cross be there. When are these idiots going to realize they sound just as bad?
 
2013-03-30 07:07:31 PM
Sigh- another atheist here who wants to ditto "You're Not Helping"

There are important battles to fight to keep religion out of various places, and this just isn't one of them.  It became an important symbol to many people after 9/11, and obviously belongs in any museum devoted to that day.  Is the next target removing all the Stars of David from the Holocaust Museum?
 
2013-03-30 07:07:43 PM

jaytkay: God really stepped up that day. Without that cross, 9/11 would have been a real tragedy.


They see me trollin', they hatin'
 
2013-03-30 07:07:56 PM
This is the hill atheists should die on. Keep that cross out at all costs.

It may give you the warm and fuzzies to see it, but the human race needs to grow up. There is no Santa, Billy.

This far, no further!
 
2013-03-30 07:08:21 PM
I'm an atheist and I do get worked up about some shiat.

This doesn't bother me in the slightest. It was a symbol that brought comfort and meaning to some, wasn't created after the fact or anything, and is completely appropriate to include in a museum.

And militant atheists don't bother me nearly as much as militant religious folk; generally only one of those will advocate killing you...though both may WANT to. ;)

But yeah, wrong battle...totally.
 
2013-03-30 07:08:48 PM

davidphogan: As far as the article, I'm an atheist, but the cross is part of the story.  It was well documented at the time, and is part of the history of 9/11.  I see no problem with it being in the museum.


Not sure whether that was just a throwaway line or not...but,  just in case you were under the impression I have some problem with the ruling, I'd like to point out that I have no objection to the inclusion of the "cross" or anything else.

It just doesn't matter to me.
 
2013-03-30 07:09:05 PM
Not having the government endorse any religion does not mean you get to banish all signs of religion from public view, you twits. This crap only makes people more hostile towards those of us atheists who don't care what anyone believes. I just regard religion as an interesting part of our varied American culture.
 
2013-03-30 07:18:59 PM

Philip_CM: "The World Trade Center cross, two intersecting steel beams that held up when the twin towers collapsed on September 11, 2001, is seen as iconic to some."

So, you mean to tell me that American Atheists (and I'm agnostic, mind you) are throwing their hands in the air over what's to some the architectural equivalent of french toast Jesus, despite the fact that they're remnants of 9/11? That's an answer to a nonexistent problem if I've ever read one.


To me, it's offensive because the people who want it there want it as a symbol of their religion, despite the fact that the thing they wish to honor is largely responsible for the tragedy.
 
2013-03-30 07:22:14 PM

firefly212: Atheist or no, the purpose of the museum is to commemorate what happened, and what happened in that crisis was that many people turned to God for answers, the cross, a symbol not created by the state for that, was the symbol that many turned to when turning to God. Not believing in God isn't a rational reason for editing history to make it seem as though those who were there, or the families of those who were there, did not believe in God. History is what it is, not what we want it to be. Having the 9/11 cross in a museum is no more of an endorsement of religion than having whips and chains in a museum is an endorsement of slavery.

History is an unbalanced, unfair biatch... "correcting" it to be more inclusive, less abrasive, more or less bad than it was is a disservice to everyone, regardless of their perspective with respect to that history.


^This.

Plus to those who say w/o religion, people would be nicer to each other?  No they wouldn't; they'd just find other excuses for the beastliness, because that's how human nature works.  Not all atheists are compassionate, tolerant intellectuals and not all believers are vile, bigoted idiots.  Most people are a fairly even mix of good characteristics and bad ones, slightly weighted toward the good.  At either end of the spectrum are people who are either really good or totally shiatty.

/Atheist of the Einstein variety: I can't prove there is no god, but I think it's extremely unlikely.  I'll find out for sure when I die.
 
2013-03-30 07:25:20 PM

theotherles: REO-Weedwagon: [2.bp.blogspot.com image 344x400]

Let the cross stand as a monument to the question every Jesus-worshiper avoids: Where was your omnipotent, all-powerful, all-loving Jesus when 3,000 people were murdered?

F*CK YES!

Where was your God over the last century when over a hundred million people were murdered by various so-called governments?


img204.imageshack.us
 
2013-03-30 07:25:35 PM

The Bestest: Vangor: Still, cannot fault the American Atheists for undertaking this because each case helps better establish the lines. Considering the sheer amount of First Amendment violations which are undertaken each year and have continued for decades without opposition, such legal cases require some protracted fighting.

I disagree. Picking the wrong battles absolutely can end up doing more harm to your cause than good. It's why half the crap the NAACP does infuriates me.



Man are you kidding I love March Madness
 
2013-03-30 07:26:17 PM
Why are the atheists who file these type of lawsuits as well as usually being the ones who scream, "OMG! We are being oppressed" on top of their media soap boxes are almost always rich, straight, white men?

Is it this desire of wanting to be part of the oppression train? Because if you aren't being held down by "The Man," you are "The Man?"
 
2013-03-30 07:26:25 PM
I think it was pointed out when it came to nativity scenes on government/public property that all religions gets equal space or no nativity scenes on government/public property.

I see it as if one religious symbol is in that they all go in with equal space and/or size or the cross get booted out.
 
2013-03-30 07:26:48 PM

ecmoRandomNumbers: violentsalvation: I bet the heat and kinetic energy of the collapse left some mangled steel beams strewn about like a spaghetti monster.

The problem with pastafarianism is that it doesn't have its own city. No Mecca, Jerusalem, Vatican, or Salt Lake City. You have to have a city if you want to be a legitimate religion.


How about Des Moines Iowa? I hear they are up for being a Holy City. Just leave Pittsburgh alone...we already have the Steeler religion.
 
2013-03-30 07:27:00 PM

jcooli09: Philip_CM: "The World Trade Center cross, two intersecting steel beams that held up when the twin towers collapsed on September 11, 2001, is seen as iconic to some."

So, you mean to tell me that American Atheists (and I'm agnostic, mind you) are throwing their hands in the air over what's to some the architectural equivalent of french toast Jesus, despite the fact that they're remnants of 9/11? That's an answer to a nonexistent problem if I've ever read one.

To me, it's offensive because the people who want it there want it as a symbol of their religion, despite the fact that the thing they wish to honor is largely responsible for the tragedy.


Religion isn't responsible for the tragedy.  The primary reason for the tragedy is power, fueled by economics.  Religion is nothing more than the tool that the power-hungry types used to convince idiots to die for them.  That's like blaming the firearm for the killing when someone had to pull the trigger.
 
2013-03-30 07:27:16 PM

thisisyourbrainonFark: theotherles: REO-Weedwagon: [2.bp.blogspot.com image 344x400]

Let the cross stand as a monument to the question every Jesus-worshiper avoids: Where was your omnipotent, all-powerful, all-loving Jesus when 3,000 people were murdered?

F*CK YES!

Where was your God over the last century when over a hundred million people were murdered by various so-called governments?

[img204.imageshack.us image 640x480]


That image is going to haunt my dreams. Thanks.
 
2013-03-30 07:30:13 PM

Krymson Tyde: Atheist asshole trifecta in play.

Good job, assholes.


ct.fra.bz
 
2013-03-30 07:31:41 PM
What's the big farking deal?
 
2013-03-30 07:32:27 PM

ronaprhys: jcooli09: Philip_CM: "The World Trade Center cross, two intersecting steel beams that held up when the twin towers collapsed on September 11, 2001, is seen as iconic to some."

So, you mean to tell me that American Atheists (and I'm agnostic, mind you) are throwing their hands in the air over what's to some the architectural equivalent of french toast Jesus, despite the fact that they're remnants of 9/11? That's an answer to a nonexistent problem if I've ever read one.

To me, it's offensive because the people who want it there want it as a symbol of their religion, despite the fact that the thing they wish to honor is largely responsible for the tragedy.

Religion isn't responsible for the tragedy.  The primary reason for the tragedy is power, fueled by economics.  Religion is nothing more than the tool that the power-hungry types used to convince idiots to die for them.  That's like blaming the firearm for the killing when someone had to pull the trigger.


that's a cop out, just like the gun argument.  Religion feeds the us against them mentality, yes it's a tool but it's a tool that is too easily used by too many.  If it held less power there would be fewer dead bodies, just like guns.

Guns and religion should both be legal, but they should also bring shame to those who use them as a crutch against their fear.
 
2013-03-30 07:33:05 PM

jcooli09: I don't see it as an asshole move to try to block the inclusion of a christian symbol from the museum, but I do see the attempt at inclusion as an asshole move.


Oh for fark's sake. It's NOT about the "Christian symbol". It's about an iconic image that is important to a lot of people. And not important because it's a a cross. The assholes here are the people trying to block it. And the people defending the attempt.
 
2013-03-30 07:33:13 PM
We could just slap one of those coexist bumper stickers I see on cars these days. They have almost everything.
 
2013-03-30 07:34:41 PM

The Bestest: A judge may side with you today, but if his ruling comes to a chorus of boos, tomorrow a congressman proposes a law that reverses it.


Sure, and as long as the law is constitutional this could be upheld. My point is people should be offended not when organizations are quite public and proper in action but when officials are hidden and unscrupulous to corrupt in action.
 
2013-03-30 07:35:04 PM
ronaprhys:Religion isn't responsible for the tragedy.  The primary reason for the tragedy is power, fueled by economics.  Religion is nothing more than the tool that the power-hungry types used to convince idiots to die for them.  That's like blaming the firearm for the killing when someone had to pull the trigger.

Kind of.  Religion poisons the mind into believe that faith (belief without evidence) is a virtue.  Belief without evidence is a bad idea by itself, but it also causes your brain to malfunction about other ideas, too. If believing without evidence is a virtue, then you can safely disregard good ideas and keep bad ones without any consideration of how those beliefs align with reality. You have cut the tether between evidence and reason to believe.  That's crazy-town.

If you need examples of what this looks like, view kurmudgeon's post above. He thinks that because people can't disprove his particular deity, it must be true.  He's either retarded, or doesn't understand the relationship between reality and belief. If the latter, good money says that religion made him that way.
 
2013-03-30 07:36:40 PM

WI241TH: "We are confident that we will eventually win this case and that cross will be removed, or atheists will be allowed to have our own symbol in there," he said.

Why wasn't this the main goal in the first place?  It's an historical artifact and I have no problem with it being displayed in the museum so long as they're not denying all other symbols.


Couldn't find any spaghetti in the wreckage.
 
2013-03-30 07:37:40 PM
If 'power poles' and anything "t" shaped make you upset, it's you.
 
2013-03-30 07:38:33 PM

Vangor:  He appears to be missing the point.


Let's just fast forward to this.
 
2013-03-30 07:40:03 PM

Some Bass Playing Guy: jcooli09: I don't see it as an asshole move to try to block the inclusion of a christian symbol from the museum, but I do see the attempt at inclusion as an asshole move.

Oh for fark's sake. It's NOT about the "Christian symbol". It's about an iconic image that is important to a lot of people. And not important because it's a a cross. The assholes here are the people trying to block it. And the people defending the attempt.


bullshiat.  People want it there because they see it as their god.  Most of them will see it as a beautiful reaffirmation of their faith, but that's the very fantasy that made it possible.  It's obscene.
 
2013-03-30 07:40:05 PM

wiredroach: I think it's entirely appropriate to include the cross of girders in the 9/11 museum. It's a stellar example of misguided religious thinking which reinforces unfounded superstition at the expense of rational thought.

The reason a cross was found in the wreckage at Ground Zero is because hundreds of thousands of such intersecting girders were used in the towers' construction. Structures are built at 90-degree angles because putting load-bearing structures perpendicular to the force of gravity is the strongest and most efficient method of construction.

It would have been a miracle if search teams hadn't found any cross-like shapes in the wreckage at Ground Zero.

People who find meaning in this artifact do so because they're attempting to retrofit the laws of physics into their religious belief systems. This nonsensical demand that the entire world conform to the religious preferences of some is what led to the attacks on the twin towers in the first place.

So it's a perfect metaphor for why the tragedy happened, and as long as there are people who see the welded intersection of two structural beams and regard it as a personal sign from God, there will be people willing to commit future 9/11s.


Meh.  I'll go with the theory that it's a subtle, ironic reminder of the Christian imperialism that caused the perfectly justified act of self-defense.
 
2013-03-30 07:41:12 PM

jcooli09: Philip_CM: "The World Trade Center cross, two intersecting steel beams that held up when the twin towers collapsed on September 11, 2001, is seen as iconic to some."

So, you mean to tell me that American Atheists (and I'm agnostic, mind you) are throwing their hands in the air over what's to some the architectural equivalent of french toast Jesus, despite the fact that they're remnants of 9/11? That's an answer to a nonexistent problem if I've ever read one.

To me, it's offensive because the people who want it there want it as a symbol of their religion, despite the fact that the thing they wish to honor is largely responsible for the tragedy.



The museum exists to preserve the story of 9/11 for future generations. The beams and those that rallied around them are part of that story. Discarding it on the basis that it resembles an offensive symbol is akin to discarding anything with a Swastika from a Holocaust museum.
 
2013-03-30 07:42:15 PM

eraser8: davidphogan: As far as the article, I'm an atheist, but the cross is part of the story.  It was well documented at the time, and is part of the history of 9/11.  I see no problem with it being in the museum.

Not sure whether that was just a throwaway line or not...but,  just in case you were under the impression I have some problem with the ruling, I'd like to point out that I have no objection to the inclusion of the "cross" or anything else.

It just doesn't matter to me.


Sorry for the confusion, I meant that as a separate thought from my duck rape response.
 
2013-03-30 07:43:00 PM

Zeb Hesselgresser: Vangor:  He appears to be missing the point.

Let's just fast forward to this.


Who are these people?
 
2013-03-30 07:43:34 PM

jcooli09: bullshiat.  People want it there because they see it as their god.  Most of them will see it as a beautiful reaffirmation of their faith, but that's the very fantasy that made it possible.  It's obscene.


So? Even supposing all of that, where is the harm?
 
2013-03-30 07:44:33 PM

vabeard: Zeb Hesselgresser: Vangor:  He appears to be missing the point.

Let's just fast forward to this.

Who are these people?


This post went horribly wrong.
 
2013-03-30 07:45:05 PM

Zeno-25: [1.bp.blogspot.com image 730x378]


I would put that image right next to the cross with a plaque that said "We hope your offended."
 
2013-03-30 07:45:32 PM

theotherles: REO-Weedwagon: [2.bp.blogspot.com image 344x400]

Let the cross stand as a monument to the question every Jesus-worshiper avoids: Where was your omnipotent, all-powerful, all-loving Jesus when 3,000 people were murdered?

F*CK YES!

Where was your God over the last century when over a hundred million people were murdered by various so-called governments?


Y'all seem to think that noblesse oblige applies to God.  The universe is under no obligation to make sense to you.  How could its Creator be?
 
2013-03-30 07:47:39 PM

Allen262: I think it was pointed out when it came to nativity scenes on government/public property that all religions gets equal space or no nativity scenes on government/public property.

I see it as if one religious symbol is in that they all go in with equal space and/or size or the cross get booted out.


Whoever pointed that out hasn't read the SCOTUS decisions on the subject.
 
2013-03-30 07:49:56 PM
this born-again pagan gives not a fark if there is a cross present
it is JUST a symbol
 
2013-03-30 07:49:59 PM

The Bestest: jcooli09: bullshiat.  People want it there because they see it as their god.  Most of them will see it as a beautiful reaffirmation of their faith, but that's the very fantasy that made it possible.  It's obscene.

So? Even supposing all of that, where is the harm?


the harm is that it tends to reinforce the lie that is religion.  It'll be honored and worshipped where it should be reviled.  It's a big green loogie in the eye of the victims, and increases the probability that it'll happen again.

If it's included it should be for it's irony, the symbol of the cause of the tragedy being loved so much by so many of those who survived.
 
2013-03-30 07:52:06 PM

jcooli09: The Bestest: jcooli09: bullshiat.  People want it there because they see it as their god.  Most of them will see it as a beautiful reaffirmation of their faith, but that's the very fantasy that made it possible.  It's obscene.

So? Even supposing all of that, where is the harm?

the harm is that it tends to reinforce the lie that is religion.  It'll be honored and worshipped where it should be reviled.  It's a big green loogie in the eye of the victims, and increases the probability that it'll happen again.

If it's included it should be for it's irony, the symbol of the cause of the tragedy being loved so much by so many of those who survived.


Symbols can convey different meanings to different viewers.  Take Tarot cards, for example.
 
2013-03-30 07:52:51 PM

eraser8:  I know some ducks who are complete (metaphorical) jackasses.


You know some ducks...

i47.tinypic.com
 
2013-03-30 07:54:40 PM

REO-Weedwagon: [2.bp.blogspot.com image 344x400]

Let the cross stand as a monument to the question every Jesus-worshiper avoids: Where was your omnipotent, all-powerful, all-loving Jesus when 3,000 people were murdered?


This^∞.
 
2013-03-30 08:01:16 PM

jcooli09: the harm is that it tends to reinforce the lie that is religion.  It'll be honored and worshipped where it should be reviled.  It's a big green loogie in the eye of the victims, and increases the probability that it'll happen again.

If it's included it should be for it's irony, the symbol of the cause of the tragedy being loved so much by so many of those who survived.


This is an example of anti-theism and just as bad as evangelism in my opinion. You are -imposing- your beliefs (or lack thereof) upon others and are the reason many atheists frown upon anti-theists due to the association.
 
2013-03-30 08:02:12 PM

eraser8: Mugato: Jesus Christ, atheists can be assholes.

Any person can be an asshole.

Christians can be assholes.

Muslims can be assholes.

Hindus can be assholes.

Drinkers can be assholes.

Teetotalers can be assholes.

Men can be assholes.

Women can be assholes.

Hell, you don't even need to be human to be an asshole.  I know some ducks who are complete (metaphorical) jackasses.


But obviously not the Jews....

/I keed..I'm an asshole.
 
2013-03-30 08:13:06 PM

jcooli09: bullshiat.  People want it there because they see it as their god.  Most of them will see it as a beautiful reaffirmation of their faith, but that's the very fantasy that made it possible.  It's obscene.


jcooli09: the harm is that it tends to reinforce the lie that is religion.  It'll be honored and worshipped where it should be reviled.  It's a big green loogie in the eye of the victims, and increases the probability that it'll happen again.

If it's included it should be for it's irony, the symbol of the cause of the tragedy being loved so much by so many of those who survived.


Damn, you're weak-minded.  And a dick.  First off, it's not your position to determine that this is a bad thing for the victims.

On top of that, to call a symbol of something you don't believe in obscene, just because you don't like it, shows you clearly don't know the meaning of the word.  Basically, you're no different than that pic of the angry kid with the caption, "quit liking what I don't like".
 
2013-03-30 08:13:13 PM
How about just putting up a globe and saying we were all Farked. Maybe we should all shut up and see that the debate we are having about the cross  displayed is one of the many reasons we cannot  come to peace. Many want to make life in their own way and Fark the rest.  This is why we need to legalize weed.

Disclaimer: This post was not brought to you my the Cannabis  growers International nor any of the Cannabis  growers International  alliances.  Nor was it brought to you by any religious or non-religious organization.

Disclaimer II : This post is not intended by the poster, who has hiked way too much today and has filled his belly with beer, to be read by anyone..  That includes you!
 
2013-03-30 08:14:00 PM

The Bestest: This is an example of anti-theism and just as bad as evangelism in my opinion. You are -imposing- your beliefs (or lack thereof) upon others and are the reason many atheists frown upon anti-theists due to the association.


Sorry, but we have the right to defend our society from the corrosive effects of superstition.  Deal with it, and get over it.
 
2013-03-30 08:15:04 PM

REO-Weedwagon: [2.bp.blogspot.com image 344x400]

Let the cross stand as a monument to the question every Jesus-worshiper avoids: Where was your omnipotent, all-powerful, all-loving Jesus when 3,000 people were murdered?


LOL STUPID 9/11 VICTIMS, WHERE IS YOUR SKY FAIRY NOW?!? You are right, no Christian in two thousand years has ever tried to offer an explanation for why bad things happen to good people, or even noticed that it happens in the first place. In fact, your question is so original that you may well be the greatest genius in world history.
 
2013-03-30 08:16:45 PM
I think it should be included with a sign at the bottom that states,

"This cross is place here so you can remember your all knowing, all seeing, all powerful God sat back and did nothing to stop the attack or the collapse of the World Trade Center towers.  Hell, he didn't even delay it so the people could exit the building safely.  Either he is a utter and complete asshole or he doesn't exist.  Either way you should stop worshiping him."
 
2013-03-30 08:20:22 PM

Man On Pink Corner: The Bestest: This is an example of anti-theism and just as bad as evangelism in my opinion. You are -imposing- your beliefs (or lack thereof) upon others and are the reason many atheists frown upon anti-theists due to the association.

Sorry, but we have the right to defend our society from the corrosive effects of superstition.  Deal with it, and get over it.


It's not only your society.  I'm  an atheist, and I don't want your defense.  It sucks balls.

It's kinda funny:  Jesus thought he had the right to get everyone's sins forgiven.
 
2013-03-30 08:20:47 PM

JeffreyScott: I think it should be included with a sign at the bottom that states,

"This cross is place here so you can remember your all knowing, all seeing, all powerful God sat back and did nothing to stop the attack or the collapse of the World Trade Center towers.  Hell, he didn't even delay it so the people could exit the building safely.  Either he is a utter and complete asshole or he doesn't exist.  Either way you should stop worshiping him."


I am OK with this
 
2013-03-30 08:21:44 PM

Man On Pink Corner: The Bestest: This is an example of anti-theism and just as bad as evangelism in my opinion. You are -imposing- your beliefs (or lack thereof) upon others and are the reason many atheists frown upon anti-theists due to the association.

Sorry, but we have the right to defend our society from the corrosive effects of superstition.  Deal with it, and get over it.


And there's nothing like the random crossing of two beams surviving to make people suddenly start flocking to Westboro Baptist.

Idiot.  Seriously.  Fight the corrosive effects - but this isn't one of them.  This will encourage no more nor less hate.
 
2013-03-30 08:21:55 PM

EvilRacistNaziFascist: You are right, no Christian in two thousand years has ever tried to offer an explanation for why bad things happen to good people, or even noticed that it happens in the first place.


Well, no Christian has ever come up with one that made any sense. Which is kinda the same thing.
 
2013-03-30 08:22:30 PM

Man On Pink Corner: Sorry, but we have the right to defend our society from the corrosive effects of superstition.  Deal with it, and get over it.


There's a huge, HUGE difference between defending against religion infringing upon one's rights and infringing upon one's freedom of religion.
 
2013-03-30 08:25:19 PM

ronaprhys: jcooli09: bullshiat.  People want it there because they see it as their god.  Most of them will see it as a beautiful reaffirmation of their faith, but that's the very fantasy that made it possible.  It's obscene.

jcooli09: the harm is that it tends to reinforce the lie that is religion.  It'll be honored and worshipped where it should be reviled.  It's a big green loogie in the eye of the victims, and increases the probability that it'll happen again.

If it's included it should be for it's irony, the symbol of the cause of the tragedy being loved so much by so many of those who survived.

Damn, you're weak-minded.  And a dick.  First off, it's not your position to determine that this is a bad thing for the victims.

On top of that, to call a symbol of something you don't believe in obscene, just because you don't like it, shows you clearly don't know the meaning of the word.  Basically, you're no different than that pic of the angry kid with the caption, "quit liking what I don't like".


Just because you can't understand what I'm saying is no reason to get so upset, Nancy.
 
2013-03-30 08:26:06 PM
I often hear from the religious  that 'atheism is a religion'. Fine, so would there be any objection to a shrine remembering, specifically, the atheists who died in the attack? Like a plate of spaghetti or a teapot?
 
2013-03-30 08:27:25 PM

jcooli09: the harm is that it tends to reinforce the lie that is religion.  It'll be honored and worshipped where it should be reviled.  It's a big green loogie in the eye of the victims, and increases the probability that it'll happen again.

If it's included it should be for it's irony, the symbol of the cause of the tragedy being loved so much by so many of those who survived.



So if someone holds a different opinion of something, it should be censored?

In that case, I view the National Mall as one big porn-fest. The Washington Monument is an obvious phallic symbol , the capitol building has a boob on top, the reflecting pool is a... well that should be obvious, especially given it's proximity to the Washington Monument.

So, would you support a move to de-pornify our nation's capitol and remove these offensive images from public view? Or are offensive icons only meant to be censored when you're the one being offended?
 
2013-03-30 08:27:43 PM

jcooli09: Some Bass Playing Guy: jcooli09: I don't see it as an asshole move to try to block the inclusion of a christian symbol from the museum, but I do see the attempt at inclusion as an asshole move.

Oh for fark's sake. It's NOT about the "Christian symbol". It's about an iconic image that is important to a lot of people. And not important because it's a a cross. The assholes here are the people trying to block it. And the people defending the attempt.

bullshiat.  People want it there because they see it as their god.  Most of them will see it as a beautiful reaffirmation of their faith, but that's the very fantasy that made it possible.  It's obscene.


You're one of THOSE atheists, then. ?
 
2013-03-30 08:30:25 PM

jcooli09: Just because you can't understand what I'm saying is no reason to get so upset, Nancy.


Understanding what you're saying is very easy to do.  Unfortunately for you, it's not anything original, intelligent, or particularly well thought out.

Quit liking what I don't like.
 
2013-03-30 08:30:25 PM

cman: Its people like you that give people like me a bad name.

Lets take a look at this shall we?

Are they forcing you to pray at the base of the cross? Are they forcing you to admit the existence of God? Are they even using verses from the bible?



Using that logic, putting a huge cross on public land in front of every courthouse in the country should be okay.
 
2013-03-30 08:33:27 PM

Man On Pink Corner: Sorry, but we have the right to defend our society from the corrosive effects of superstition.  Deal with it, and get over it.


Some of the "corrosive effects" of Christianity have included great works of art, extensive charitable endeavours, and moral campaigns such as the abolition of slavery in the British Empire. You can't indict religion for the bad things done in its name while throwing out the good things: that is hypocrisy. Besides, when it comes to slaughter the Christians were amateurs compared to those following the avowedly atheist totalitarian system of Communism, whose death toll has amounted to upward of eighty million in one century alone (and they didn't even produce an equivalent to Bach, Michelangelo, or Dante).

The problem is not with religion as such but with man's propensity to hold irrational beliefs and to want to use them to dominate his neighbours, and this can also manifest itself in secular ways: political ideologies serve the same purpose for most people nowadays as faith did for our ancestors. You only have to read a political discussion on Fark to see how many commenters around here treat politics as a substitute religion giving their lives meaning, and with its own corresponding ideas of original sin (white guilt), the lost paradise (the pre- industrial and/or tribal and/or aboriginal and/or matriarchal way of life), the division of humanity into the saved and damned (those who are part of the problem (conservatives) and those who are part of the solution(left- liberals)), and the promised utopia of the future that will arrive once the enemies of goodness have been gotten out of the way (a carbon- free future, perhaps, a de-industrialized world, a one- world government, or whatever else strikes their fancy). Much like Christians, too, politically- minded people tend to lash out viciously at those who question their dogma: and if you doubt it, just watch the replies to this post!
 
2013-03-30 08:33:53 PM

the ha ha guy: jcooli09: the harm is that it tends to reinforce the lie that is religion.  It'll be honored and worshipped where it should be reviled.  It's a big green loogie in the eye of the victims, and increases the probability that it'll happen again.

If it's included it should be for it's irony, the symbol of the cause of the tragedy being loved so much by so many of those who survived.


So if someone holds a different opinion of something, it should be censored?

In that case, I view the National Mall as one big porn-fest. The Washington Monument is an obvious phallic symbol , the capitol building has a boob on top, the reflecting pool is a... well that should be obvious, especially given it's proximity to the Washington Monument.

So, would you support a move to de-pornify our nation's capitol and remove these offensive images from public view? Or are offensive icons only meant to be censored when you're the one being offended?


porn is much less damaging than religion, so I'm ok with it.  How about you?

Also, porn wasn't designed as a way to control weak minded or frightened people.  It's also much less pervasive in the world, and doesn't try to convert or destroy those that don't submit to it.
 
2013-03-30 08:33:53 PM

Jeep2011: JeffreyScott: I think it should be included with a sign at the bottom that states,

"This cross is place here so you can remember your all knowing, all seeing, all powerful God sat back and did nothing to stop the attack or the collapse of the World Trade Center towers.  Hell, he didn't even delay it so the people could exit the building safely.  Either he is a utter and complete asshole or he doesn't exist.  Either way you should stop worshiping him."

I am OK with this


I dunno, that's a pretty stupid stance and screams "I have no clue what I'm talking about." Someone already mentioned Free Will and the fact that God never said he would protect mankind from all the evils we insist upon inflicting on ourselves; that side of God ended with The Garden of Eden. (If you believe Jewish Tradition)

I appreciate all of the Atheists who have come out and stated their opposition to this suit and could care less if the cross is in the museum. Anything I say further goes towards the tantrum throwing children who claim to represent your side in the theological debate.

The cross represents a symbol that many people drew strength, courage, and a sense of hope from in a time of great tragedy. Nobody made it, crafted it and planted it there, it happened by coincidence and was adopted as a symbol of all that is good in "Faith". Of course it deserves to be in the museum, and no, an Atheist, Hindu, Budhist or any other type of religious symbol does not need to be added; as far as I know, they weren't there being latched on to by tons of people.

Anyone who has a problem with this because it "represents religion" is childlike in the sense that they are carrying a stupid, pointless and huge chip on their shoulder that will only serve to make their own lives miserable, and other innocents lives miserable through collateral damage. Grow the fark up.
 
2013-03-30 08:37:34 PM

3rdtimearound: I often hear from the religious  that 'atheism is a religion'. Fine, so would there be any objection to a shrine remembering, specifically, the atheists who died in the attack? Like a plate of spaghetti or a teapot?


People who say that also stretch the definition of "racism" until it's useless. Ignore them.
 
2013-03-30 08:37:34 PM
I really pity all the anti-theists in this thread with so much apparent hate in their hearts. Do they really think if all the world's religions went away we'd suddenly be in a Star Trek communistic utopia? Kindness to your fellow man is a learned trait. Being honest and expecting others to be honest with you is mutually beneficial in the long run. If that kindness is generated by their faith in a god, or from just an intellectual understanding of how to fit into society, it should be celebrated. Point out evil where you see it, not the hate against someone who believes something you don't. It isn't worth your time and has no benefit.
 
2013-03-30 08:39:31 PM

CanisNoir: Jeep2011: JeffreyScott: I think it should be included with a sign at the bottom that states,

"This cross is place here so you can remember your all knowing, all seeing, all powerful God sat back and did nothing to stop the attack or the collapse of the World Trade Center towers.  Hell, he didn't even delay it so the people could exit the building safely.  Either he is a utter and complete asshole or he doesn't exist.  Either way you should stop worshiping him."

I am OK with this

I dunno, that's a pretty stupid stance and screams "I have no clue what I'm talking about." Someone already mentioned Free Will and the fact that God never said he would protect mankind from all the evils we insist upon inflicting on ourselves; that side of God ended with The Garden of Eden. (If you believe Jewish Tradition)

I appreciate all of the Atheists who have come out and stated their opposition to this suit and could care less if the cross is in the museum. Anything I say further goes towards the tantrum throwing children who claim to represent your side in the theological debate.

The cross represents a symbol that many people drew strength, courage, and a sense of hope from in a time of great tragedy. Nobody made it, crafted it and planted it there, it happened by coincidence and was adopted as a symbol of all that is good in "Faith". Of course it deserves to be in the museum, and no, an Atheist, Hindu, Budhist or any other type of religious symbol does not need to be added; as far as I know, they weren't there being latched on to by tons of people.

Anyone who has a problem with this because it "represents religion" is childlike in the sense that they are carrying a stupid, pointless and huge chip on their shoulder that will only serve to make their own lives miserable, and other innocents lives miserable through collateral damage. Grow the fark up.


The only thing that I'd say to dispute this is that if the religious symbol for any other religion had happened to show up like this one did (which is unlikely, given the complexities of most symbols - this one happens to be damned easy to come up randomly), then they'd deserve to be included if they brought similar comfort.  For example, say there had been an art exhibit and a huge menorah had managed to live through the carnage, completely unscathed, then I'd say it should be included.
 
2013-03-30 08:42:00 PM

CanisNoir: Jeep2011: JeffreyScott: I think it should be included with a sign at the bottom that states,

"This cross is place here so you can remember your all knowing, all seeing, all powerful God sat back and did nothing to stop the attack or the collapse of the World Trade Center towers.  Hell, he didn't even delay it so the people could exit the building safely.  Either he is a utter and complete asshole or he doesn't exist.  Either way you should stop worshiping him."

I am OK with this

I dunno, that's a pretty stupid stance and screams "I have no clue what I'm talking about." Someone already mentioned Free Will and the fact that God never said he would protect mankind from all the evils we insist upon inflicting on ourselves; that side of God ended with The Garden of Eden. (If you believe Jewish Tradition)

I appreciate all of the Atheists who have come out and stated their opposition to this suit and could care less if the cross is in the museum. Anything I say further goes towards the tantrum throwing children who claim to represent your side in the theological debate.

The cross represents a symbol that many people drew strength, courage, and a sense of hope from in a time of great tragedy. Nobody made it, crafted it and planted it there, it happened by coincidence and was adopted as a symbol of all that is good in "Faith". Of course it deserves to be in the museum, and no, an Atheist, Hindu, Budhist or any other type of religious symbol does not need to be added; as far as I know, they weren't there being latched on to by tons of people.

Anyone who has a problem with this because it "represents religion" is childlike in the sense that they are carrying a stupid, pointless and huge chip on their shoulder that will only serve to make their own lives miserable, and other innocents lives miserable through collateral damage. Grow the fark up.


I agree. As an atheist, I stay out of these issues - because it means nothing to me. I would much rather see members of other faiths deal with it - like having a Muslim demand a crescent be placed right next to the cross.
Just for the entertainment value, you understand. You'd support that, right? I mean what with you being a grownup, and all.
 
2013-03-30 08:42:16 PM

jcooli09: porn is much less damaging than religion, so I'm ok with it.  How about you?



You don't find it offensive therefore it's fine? Thanks for proving my point.

To answer your question, I would argue that there are more people in the US who find porn offensive than there are who find religious icons offensive.

So my question is, what makes your right to not be offended greater than the right of others to not be offended? Why should the ground-zero cross be erased from history while enormous genitalia is glorified and printed on our money?
 
2013-03-30 08:43:15 PM

wiredroach: EvilRacistNaziFascist: You are right, no Christian in two thousand years has ever tried to offer an explanation for why bad things happen to good people, or even noticed that it happens in the first place.

Well, no Christian has ever come up with one that made any sense. Which is kinda the same thing.


They may not have come up with one you could agree with, and that's understandable; I can't honestly say I believe it myself. But then again, consider the atheist alternative, which is to say that bad things happen to good people because the universe is indifferent to us to the point of letting us suffer and die for even the most pointless reason, and it's because life sucks and there's not a goddamn thing we can do about that. I can well understand why people would prefer to believe in a complicated story involving a cosmic bet involving God and Satan instead. In the end, whatever theory we adopt (whether religious or atheist) isn't going to change the fact that life is short and that each of us is going to die, so I don't begrudge anyone their consolations in the meantime. It'd be a good thing if you keyboard warriors with your LOL SKY WIZARD schtick could keep in mind that hope is the rarest and most precious of all human commodities, especially to those who suffer, grieve, are seriously ill, etc.
 
2013-03-30 08:43:26 PM

ronaprhys: jcooli09: Just because you can't understand what I'm saying is no reason to get so upset, Nancy.

Understanding what you're saying is very easy to do.  Unfortunately for you, it's not anything original, intelligent, or particularly well thought out.

Quit liking what I don't like.


clearly it allows you to feels superior, I guess that's something.

Religion isn't about god, it's about control and marketing.  This is marketing and that doesn't deserve to be enshrined.
 
2013-03-30 08:43:50 PM

the ha ha guy: jcooli09: porn is much less damaging than religion, so I'm ok with it.  How about you?


You don't find it offensive therefore it's fine? Thanks for proving my point.

To answer your question, I would argue that there are more people in the US who find porn offensive than there are who find religious icons offensive.

So my question is, what makes your right to not be offended greater than the right of others to not be offended? Why should the ground-zero cross be erased from history while enormous genitalia is glorified and printed on our money?


They took the Penis Dollar Bill out of circulation years ago, man.
 
2013-03-30 08:44:21 PM
Anyone who hates anything is not acting in his best interests.

Attacking what is not attacking you is a waste of resources.

Attributing fear generated internally to external causes is error.
 
2013-03-30 08:44:28 PM
jcooli09:

bullshiat.  People want it there because they see it as their god.  Most of them will see it as a beautiful reaffirmation of their faith, but that's the very fantasy that made it possible.  It's obscene.

This was seen by everyone after the tragedy and it is a part of that history.

You think it shouldn't be included because SOME people might see it like you described?
 
2013-03-30 08:45:47 PM

EvilRacistNaziFascist: Man On Pink Corner: Sorry, but we have the right to defend our society from the corrosive effects of superstition.  Deal with it, and get over it.

Some of the "corrosive effects" of Christianity have included great works of art, extensive charitable endeavours, and moral campaigns such as the abolition of slavery in the British Empire. You can't indict religion for the bad things done in its name while throwing out the good things: that is hypocrisy. Besides, when it comes to slaughter the Christians were amateurs compared to those following the avowedly atheist totalitarian system of Communism, whose death toll has amounted to upward of eighty million in one century alone (and they didn't even produce an equivalent to Bach, Michelangelo, or Dante).

The problem is not with religion as such but with man's propensity to hold irrational beliefs and to want to use them to dominate his neighbours, and this can also manifest itself in secular ways: political ideologies serve the same purpose for most people nowadays as faith did for our ancestors. You only have to read a political discussion on Fark to see how many commenters around here treat politics as a substitute religion giving their lives meaning, and with its own corresponding ideas of original sin (white guilt), the lost paradise (the pre- industrial and/or tribal and/or aboriginal and/or matriarchal way of life), the division of humanity into the saved and damned (those who are part of the problem (conservatives) and those who are part of the solution(left- liberals)), and the promised utopia of the future that will arrive once the enemies of goodness have been gotten out of the way (a carbon- free future, perhaps, a de-industrialized world, a one- world government, or whatever else strikes their fancy). Much like Christians, too, politically- minded people tend to lash out viciously at those who question their dogma: and if you doubt it, just watch the replies to this post!


GMTA
 
2013-03-30 08:46:32 PM

the ha ha guy: jcooli09: porn is much less damaging than religion, so I'm ok with it.  How about you?


You don't find it offensive therefore it's fine? Thanks for proving my point.

To answer your question, I would argue that there are more people in the US who find porn offensive than there are who find religious icons offensive.

So my question is, what makes your right to not be offended greater than the right of others to not be offended? Why should the ground-zero cross be erased from history while enormous genitalia is glorified and printed on our money?


It isn't about my being offended, it's about calling it like it is.  Religion is the problem, not the solution.
 
2013-03-30 08:46:35 PM

the ha ha guy: Why should the ground-zero cross be erased from history while enormous genitalia is glorified and printed on our money?


What's the exchange rate between your money and mine? :-)
 
2013-03-30 08:48:02 PM
This object is part of the history of the site.   Thus...

<span voice="Indiana Jones">It belongs in a museum</span>

/nonbeliever
 
2013-03-30 08:48:31 PM

BarkingUnicorn: Anyone who hates anything is not acting in his best interests.

Attacking what is not attacking you is a waste of resources.

Attributing fear generated internally to external causes is error.


This. To me, one of the greatest advantages to my being a godless heathen is not belonging to anything, or having to worry about what symbols other people like to look at. It would make no sense for me to attach significance to that which, by definition, has no significance to me.
 
2013-03-30 08:48:43 PM

REO-Weedwagon: Let the cross stand as a monument to the question every Jesus-worshiper avoids: Where was your omnipotent, all-powerful, all-loving Jesus when 3,000 people were murdered?


Guiding the planes?
 
2013-03-30 08:49:41 PM

ronaprhys: The only thing that I'd say to dispute this is that if the religious symbol for any other religion had happened to show up like this one did (which is unlikely, given the complexities of most symbols - this one happens to be damned easy to come up randomly), then they'd deserve to be included if they brought similar comfort. For example, say there had been an art exhibit and a huge menorah had managed to live through the carnage, completely unscathed, then I'd say it should be included.


I would agree; its inclusion isn't about the brand of faith.

jso2897: I would much rather see members of other faiths deal with it - like having a Muslim demand a crescent be placed right next to the cross.
Just for the entertainment value, you understand. You'd support that, right? I mean what with you being a grownup, and all.


See above; if a Muslim holy symbol happened to be standing in rubble and, you know, considering the context, tons of people rallied around it as a source of healing and strength then I would have no problem with it's inclusion. As it is, there shouldn't be one because one never existed. To put one in the museum is to re-write a false history.
 
2013-03-30 08:49:58 PM

jcooli09: Religion is the problem, not the solution.


Religion is the solution to many problems, just not the one you're thinking of.
 
2013-03-30 08:50:43 PM
Damn vampires
 
2013-03-30 08:51:15 PM

jcooli09: ronaprhys: jcooli09: Just because you can't understand what I'm saying is no reason to get so upset, Nancy.

Understanding what you're saying is very easy to do.  Unfortunately for you, it's not anything original, intelligent, or particularly well thought out.

Quit liking what I don't like.

clearly it allows you to feels superior, I guess that's something.

Religion isn't about god, it's about control and marketing.  This is marketing and that doesn't deserve to be enshrined.


Nope - doesn't make me feel superior at all.  For all practical purposes, I'm agnostic.  I guess I could try to argue that I could feel superior due to your idiocy, but I don't.  I feel a bit of pity, but that's about it.  Of course, that's tempered by the knowledge that you're (probably) an adult and you've made your own bed to lie in.

Again - no different than a 5yo kid throwing a temper-tantrum.
 
2013-03-30 08:51:21 PM

BarkingUnicorn: theotherles: REO-Weedwagon: [2.bp.blogspot.com image 344x400]

Let the cross stand as a monument to the question every Jesus-worshiper avoids: Where was your omnipotent, all-powerful, all-loving Jesus when 3,000 people were murdered?

F*CK YES!

Where was your God over the last century when over a hundred million people were murdered by various so-called governments?

Y'all seem to think that noblesse oblige applies to God.  The universe is under no obligation to make sense to you.  How could its Creator be?


Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?
- Epicurus
 
2013-03-30 08:51:44 PM

Amos Quito: FTA: "September 11 "affected all Americans, not just Christians," Silverman continued. "We will not sit and let the 500 atheists who died on 9/11 go unnoticed."


How does Silverman know how many atheists died on 9/11?

Were they registered atheists?


Did someone reject the atheist gravestone?
 
2013-03-30 08:53:39 PM

CanisNoir: ronaprhys: The only thing that I'd say to dispute this is that if the religious symbol for any other religion had happened to show up like this one did (which is unlikely, given the complexities of most symbols - this one happens to be damned easy to come up randomly), then they'd deserve to be included if they brought similar comfort. For example, say there had been an art exhibit and a huge menorah had managed to live through the carnage, completely unscathed, then I'd say it should be included.

I would agree; its inclusion isn't about the brand of faith.

jso2897: I would much rather see members of other faiths deal with it - like having a Muslim demand a crescent be placed right next to the cross.
Just for the entertainment value, you understand. You'd support that, right? I mean what with you being a grownup, and all.

See above; if a Muslim holy symbol happened to be standing in rubble and, you know, considering the context, tons of people rallied around it as a source of healing and strength then I would have no problem with it's inclusion. As it is, there shouldn't be one because one never existed. To put one in the museum is to re-write a false history.


Are you sure? There wasn't even one, single crescent shaped piece of metal in all  that wreckage?
Exactly what number of people would have to "rally around it" for you to let them display it?
Can you quantify your exact standard of legitimacy of "history"?
I'm just asking questions, you understand.
 
2013-03-30 08:53:49 PM

theotherles: BarkingUnicorn: theotherles: REO-Weedwagon: [2.bp.blogspot.com image 344x400]

Let the cross stand as a monument to the question every Jesus-worshiper avoids: Where was your omnipotent, all-powerful, all-loving Jesus when 3,000 people were murdered?

F*CK YES!

Where was your God over the last century when over a hundred million people were murdered by various so-called governments?

Y'all seem to think that noblesse oblige applies to God.  The universe is under no obligation to make sense to you.  How could its Creator be?

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?
- Epicurus


So lump Epicurus in among "y'all."
 
2013-03-30 08:54:42 PM

jcooli09: It isn't about my being offended, it's about calling it like it is.  Religion is the problem, not the solution.



Censoring religious icons in historical contexts will only further claims of "revisionist history", which the zealots will use as a reason to further their efforts.

If this were a memorial, yes, I would oppose the cross, just as I would oppose any religious icons. But this is in a museum designed to preserve history in an accurate and unbiased manner. You can't claim "someone might worship it" as an excuse to censor this piece of history any more than you can claim "someone might worship it" as an excuse to censor swastikas in a Holocaust museum.
 
2013-03-30 08:54:46 PM

jcooli09: the ha ha guy: jcooli09: porn is much less damaging than religion, so I'm ok with it.  How about you?


You don't find it offensive therefore it's fine? Thanks for proving my point.

To answer your question, I would argue that there are more people in the US who find porn offensive than there are who find religious icons offensive.

So my question is, what makes your right to not be offended greater than the right of others to not be offended? Why should the ground-zero cross be erased from history while enormous genitalia is glorified and printed on our money?

It isn't about my being offended, it's about calling it like it is.  Religion is the problem, not the solution.


You keep repeating the same inaccurate assertion, as if repetition will somehow make it true.  Again - it's about power.  Which, if we're honest, is part of human nature.  No different than pack dominance or any other instinctual behavior.  If religion didn't exist, another tool would be selected that does the job just as well.
 
2013-03-30 08:54:48 PM
EvilRacistNaziFascist:
They may not have come up with one you could agree with, and that's understandable; I can't honestly say I believe it myself. But then again, consider the atheist alternative, which is to say that bad things happen to good people because the universe is indifferent to us to the point of letting us suffer and die for even the most pointless reason, and it's because life sucks and there's not a goddamn thing we can do about that. I can well understand why people would prefer to believe in a complicated story involving a cosmic bet involving God and Satan instead. In the end, whatever theory we adopt (whether religious or atheist) isn't going to change the fact that life is short and that each of us is going to die, so I don't begrudge anyone their consolations in the meantime. It'd be a good thing if you keyboard warriors with your LOL SKY WIZARD schtick could keep in mind that hope is the rarest and most precious of all human commodities, especially to those who suffer, grieve, are seriously ill, etc.

This is the best case for keeping religion around. You have to keep the poor people in line. A little hope and a lot of guilt will keep them from asking why they have so little and others have so much. You just might not kill your neighbour for that loaf of bread if going to hell is the price.
 
2013-03-30 08:55:45 PM

EvilRacistNaziFascist: The problem is not with religion as such but with man's propensity to hold irrational beliefs and to want to use them to dominate his neighbours


If not religion, they just use something probably even more irrational to justify dominating others. And many forms of social manipulation work like a charm on Atheists. It's not as if the only trick that has ever existed was religion. It's just the most obvious lie to some people.
 
2013-03-30 08:55:53 PM

BarkingUnicorn: theotherles: BarkingUnicorn: theotherles: REO-Weedwagon: [2.bp.blogspot.com image 344x400]

Let the cross stand as a monument to the question every Jesus-worshiper avoids: Where was your omnipotent, all-powerful, all-loving Jesus when 3,000 people were murdered?

F*CK YES!

Where was your God over the last century when over a hundred million people were murdered by various so-called governments?

Y'all seem to think that noblesse oblige applies to God.  The universe is under no obligation to make sense to you.  How could its Creator be?

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?
- Epicurus

So lump Epicurus in among "y'all."


Epicurus was NOT a "y'all". Pliny the Elder, maybe. He always struck me as kind of a redneck.
 
2013-03-30 08:56:27 PM
When I think 'memorial', I immediately think 'BRONZE AGE TORTURE DEVICE'.
 
2013-03-30 08:56:40 PM

hornblowerfan: This makes me embarrassed to be an atheist. We're not all like that, trust me. I think it's a beautiful symbol of 9/11 and should absolutely be included.


cosign
 
2013-03-30 08:58:06 PM

J. Frank Parnell: EvilRacistNaziFascist: The problem is not with religion as such but with man's propensity to hold irrational beliefs and to want to use them to dominate his neighbours

If not religion, they just use something probably even more irrational to justify dominating others. And many forms of social manipulation work like a charm on Atheists. It's not as if the only trick that has ever existed was religion. It's just the most obvious lie to some people.


This - the individual who really can't be conned is so rare as to be virtually non-existent.
 
2013-03-30 08:58:40 PM

jso2897: Are you sure? There wasn't even one, single crescent shaped piece of metal in all  that wreckage?
Exactly what number of people would have to "rally around it" for you to let them display it?
Can you quantify your exact standard of legitimacy of "history"?
I'm just asking questions, you understand.


To the "just asking questions" portion, you aren't. No need to lie about it.

To prove your point, find us the news articles where folks were rallying around any other symbol found.  If so, include those.  If not, you've got no point.
 
2013-03-30 08:59:17 PM

prgrmr: Also, statistically speaking, what's amazing isn't that they pulled cross-shaped steel beams from the WTC rubble; what's amazing is that they only pulled out one.


What if I told you that they are displaying it in the wrong orientation? If this piece was displayed in the same manner as when it stood at the WTC it would display as an upside down cross. I'm sure some people would have a definite problem with this.            not a factual statement
 
2013-03-30 09:02:51 PM

ronaprhys: jso2897: Are you sure? There wasn't even one, single crescent shaped piece of metal in all  that wreckage?
Exactly what number of people would have to "rally around it" for you to let them display it?
Can you quantify your exact standard of legitimacy of "history"?
I'm just asking questions, you understand.

To the "just asking questions" portion, you aren't. No need to lie about it.

To prove your point, find us the news articles where folks were rallying around any other symbol found.  If so, include those.  If not, you've got no point.


Of course I have no point - never said I did.
The kind of "lying" I am doing is called "kidding" chum. Relax.
We both know that whatever the circumstances, if somebody tried to stick up a Muslim Crescent in that museum, a whole stratum of people would shiat their pants. I would not be among them, nor am I among those who object to the Cross, or to Thor's f**king hammer if it makes somebody feel better about a rotten, shiatty thing that happened.
Lighten up, Francis.
You'll get over it.
 
2013-03-30 09:02:54 PM

jso2897: Are you sure? There wasn't even one, single crescent shaped piece of metal in all that wreckage?
Exactly what number of people would have to "rally around it" for you to let them display it?
Can you quantify your exact standard of legitimacy of "history"?



One was never reported, if one existed, not enough people rallied around it for it to become part of the national culture and representative of tragedy.

ronaprhys: To prove your point, find us the news articles where folks were rallying around any other symbol found. If so, include those. If not, you've got no point.


In other words, what he said.
 
2013-03-30 09:04:46 PM

CanisNoir: jso2897: Are you sure? There wasn't even one, single crescent shaped piece of metal in all that wreckage?
Exactly what number of people would have to "rally around it" for you to let them display it?
Can you quantify your exact standard of legitimacy of "history"?


One was never reported, if one existed, not enough people rallied around it for it to become part of the national culture and representative of tragedy.

ronaprhys: To prove your point, find us the news articles where folks were rallying around any other symbol found. If so, include those. If not, you've got no point.

In other words, what he said.


This is really important to you guys, eh?
Ok - you win - Cross good, Crescent bad.
Sure as shiat don't make no difference to me.
 
2013-03-30 09:05:31 PM

Decillion: This is the best case for keeping religion around. You have to keep the poor people in line.


Did I say that? No. I was speaking of those who are sick or who have been bereaved. Obviously you felt the need to twist my words so that they could become more representative of whatever evil fantasy right- winger you're continually battling against in your imagination (a common pathology among Farkers).

A little hope and a lot of guilt will keep them from asking why they have so little and others have so much. You just might not kill your neighbour for that loaf of bread if going to hell is the price.

Who in the United States or any other Western country is in the position of needing to kill his neighbour for a loaf of bread?! Whatever Marxist claptrap you might believe in, the origin of religion is simply an attempt to make sense of why people grow old, why they suffer, why their loved ones die, and why they then die themselves -- which is why religion of some kind or another has been almost universal throughout human history.
 
2013-03-30 09:06:22 PM

jso2897: We both know that whatever the circumstances, if somebody tried to stick up a Muslim Crescent in that museum, a whole stratum of people would shiat their pants.


You know, considering the nutjobs who precipitated the attack did so using a bastardized version of Islam, I bet you'd find quite a few people who'd be just peachy kean with a Muslim Crescent being placed in the museum, under a certain context. Personally I think that would be unfair to the millions of Islamic people who aren't nut jobs though so I wouldn't support it.


/Just sayin
 
2013-03-30 09:07:32 PM

Proximuscentauri: When I think 'memorial', I immediately think 'BRONZE AGE TORTURE DEVICE'.


And if you give it no further thought, you profit nothing.
 
2013-03-30 09:07:41 PM

EvilRacistNaziFascist: They may not have come up with one you could agree with, and that's understandable; I can't honestly say I believe it myself. But then again, consider the atheist alternative, which is to say that bad things happen to good people because the universe is indifferent to us to the point of letting us suffer and die for even the most pointless reason, and it's because life sucks and there's not a goddamn thing we can do about that. I can well understand why people would prefer to believe in a complicated story involving a cosmic bet involving God and Satan instead. In the end, whatever theory we adopt (whether religious or atheist) isn't going to change the fact that life is short and that each of us is going to die, so I don't begrudge anyone their consolations in the meantime. It'd be a good thing if you keyboard warriors with your LOL SKY WIZARD schtick could keep in mind that hope is the rarest and most precious of all human commodities, especially to those who suffer, grieve, are seriously ill, etc.


I don't begrudge anyone the solace religion can bring either; my grandmother suffered horribly from cancer but it was made easier because she believed she would go to a better place when it was over. My problem with religion is the inevitable moralizing and curtailment of nonbelievers' rights that go with it. Just because some people claim their deity is opposed to gay marriage or abortion or polygamy, etc. doesn't mean I have to live by their rules. And the Constitution tends to lean in favor of nonreligious viewpoints, no matter how much the practice goes the other way in the real world.

It's especially onerous that fundamentalists's vehemence in meddling with others' private lives seems to be in direct proportion to the ridiculousness of the foundations of their faith: "My god put Adam and Eve in a garden with a tempting fruit they were forbidden to eat--forever--and let an evil force in to tempt them further. When they inevitably went astray, they, and all their heirs forever, were punished for it, proving that they're flawed and must be redeemed. But, God is a loving god."

Sorry. That's a poor basis for ordering a democratic society, let alone one's personal life.
 
2013-03-30 09:08:12 PM

jso2897: This is really important to you guys, eh?
Ok - you win - Cross good, Crescent bad.



Not hugely important to me, no, but it's Saturday, I'm not drunk enough yet and I'm kind of bored, so I figure what the heck. Also, never did I say "Cross good Crescent Bad" - what I said was "Accurate History Good, Inaccurate History Bad." -- There's a bit of a difference.
 
2013-03-30 09:10:43 PM

EvilRacistNaziFascist: Decillion: This is the best case for keeping religion around. You have to keep the poor people in line.

Did I say that? No. I was speaking of those who are sick or who have been bereaved. Obviously you felt the need to twist my words so that they could become more representative of whatever evil fantasy right- winger you're continually battling against in your imagination (a common pathology among Farkers).

A little hope and a lot of guilt will keep them from asking why they have so little and others have so much. You just might not kill your neighbour for that loaf of bread if going to hell is the price.

Who in the United States or any other Western country is in the position of needing to kill his neighbour for a loaf of bread?! Whatever Marxist claptrap you might believe in, the origin of religion is simply an attempt to make sense of why people grow old, why they suffer, why their loved ones die, and why they then die themselves -- which is why religion of some kind or another has been almost universal throughout human history.


Exactly. This is why I (a total nonbeliever) would happily stick up every damn religious symbol in the world in that museum if it would comfort someone, or spare them any of the pain of life. If somebody can make themselves feel better by believing something, more power to them.
I make myself feel better by believing things - for instance, I believe I'll have another drink.
 
2013-03-30 09:11:01 PM

jso2897: Of course I have no point - never said I did.
The kind of "lying" I am doing is called "kidding" chum. Relax.
We both know that whatever the circumstances, if somebody tried to stick up a Muslim Crescent in that museum, a whole stratum of people would shiat their pants. I would not be among them, nor am I among those who object to the Cross, or to Thor's f**king hammer if it makes somebody feel better about a rotten, shiatty thing that happened.
Lighten up, Francis.
You'll get over it.


If you didn't have a point, you wouldn't be playing - unless you're just trolling for fun.

That being said, I would've found it amusing if another religious symbol had shown up.  In fact, probably the best would've been a Star of David.  Would've pissed off the perpetrators of the attack quite nicely, sent the conspiracy theory loons into a tizzy, and pissed off enough of the Christians to make it worthwhile.  A Buddhist symbol?  Meh - no one really hates them.  Christian?  Well, we're seeing that now and the furor is relatively slight.  The crescent?  Not enough folks here to truly drive the symbol into a museum.
 
2013-03-30 09:12:57 PM

Proximuscentauri: When I think 'memorial', I immediately think 'BRONZE AGE TORTURE DEVICE'.


The idea of the Christian cross is that an instrument of punishment has been transformed into a symbol of redemption and the victory against injustice and death -- which makes it a more fitting symbol than any other for the 9/11 memorial, really, whatever your own beliefs might be.
 
2013-03-30 09:14:03 PM

CanisNoir: jso2897: This is really important to you guys, eh?
Ok - you win - Cross good, Crescent bad.


Not hugely important to me, no, but it's Saturday, I'm not drunk enough yet and I'm kind of bored, so I figure what the heck. Also, never did I say "Cross good Crescent Bad" - what I said was "Accurate History Good, Inaccurate History Bad." -- There's a bit of a difference.


So, if putting a Muslim Crescent in that museum would make somebody feel better, you'd still be against it? It's my understanding that there are Muslims who lost loved ones in 9/11 - don't they deserve to feel better? I think everybody deserves to feel better. History, after all, is a matter of opinion, and is generally written by the winners.
 
2013-03-30 09:16:02 PM

ronaprhys: jso2897: Of course I have no point - never said I did.
The kind of "lying" I am doing is called "kidding" chum. Relax.
We both know that whatever the circumstances, if somebody tried to stick up a Muslim Crescent in that museum, a whole stratum of people would shiat their pants. I would not be among them, nor am I among those who object to the Cross, or to Thor's f**king hammer if it makes somebody feel better about a rotten, shiatty thing that happened.
Lighten up, Francis.
You'll get over it.

If you didn't have a point, you wouldn't be playing - unless you're just trolling for fun.

That being said, I would've found it amusing if another religious symbol had shown up.  In fact, probably the best would've been a Star of David.  Would've pissed off the perpetrators of the attack quite nicely, sent the conspiracy theory loons into a tizzy, and pissed off enough of the Christians to make it worthwhile.  A Buddhist symbol?  Meh - no one really hates them.  Christian?  Well, we're seeing that now and the furor is relatively slight.  The crescent?  Not enough folks here to truly drive the symbol into a museum.


Ah, so it's a matter of numbers. What percentage or number of people is require for the comfort someone might feel at seeing the symbol of their religion displayed to become legitimate, in your view?
 
2013-03-30 09:17:56 PM

EvilRacistNaziFascist: Proximuscentauri: When I think 'memorial', I immediately think 'BRONZE AGE TORTURE DEVICE'.

The idea of the Christian cross is that an instrument of punishment has been transformed into a symbol of redemption and the victory against injustice and death -- which makes it a more fitting symbol than any other for the 9/11 memorial, really, whatever your own beliefs might be.


Above all, it is the symbol of the "comeback" that is so beloved.  Like Rocky Balboa or Gabrielle Giffords.
 
2013-03-30 09:19:08 PM

BarkingUnicorn: EvilRacistNaziFascist: Proximuscentauri: When I think 'memorial', I immediately think 'BRONZE AGE TORTURE DEVICE'.

The idea of the Christian cross is that an instrument of punishment has been transformed into a symbol of redemption and the victory against injustice and death -- which makes it a more fitting symbol than any other for the 9/11 memorial, really, whatever your own beliefs might be.

Above all, it is the symbol of the "comeback" that is so beloved.  Like Rocky Balboa or Gabrielle Giffords.


Odd - when I think "bronze age torture device", bagpipes spring to mind.
 
2013-03-30 09:23:57 PM

jso2897: So, if putting a Muslim Crescent in that museum would make somebody feel better, you'd still be against it? It's my understanding that there are Muslims who lost loved ones in 9/11 - don't they deserve to feel better? I think everybody deserves to feel better. History, after all, is a matter of opinion, and is generally written by the winners.



Was there a crescent found that became an icon of hope in the Muslim world? If so, then it should be included. If not, then it's only adding objects and stories where none existed, and would discredit the historical value of the museum as a whole.
 
2013-03-30 09:24:03 PM

Decillion: This is the best case for keeping religion around. You have to keep the poor people in line. A little hope and a lot of guilt will keep them from asking why they have so little and others have so much. You just might not kill your neighbour for that loaf of bread if going to hell is the price.


I have not been enlightened so I have nothing to guide me through this life thus far. I plan on killing a man, going to prison, finding salvation and being forgiven for my sins. Others act like going to Hell is just a threat and even though they are god fearing people they will commit sins and then repent for said sins. We're good right? Phew if I left that on my chest I would have to answer for it in afterlife.
 
2013-03-30 09:24:18 PM
jso2897:Ah, so it's a matter of numbers. What percentage or number of people is require for the comfort someone might feel at seeing the symbol of their religion displayed to become legitimate, in your view?

That doesn't follow from what I wrote.  Try again.
 
2013-03-30 09:26:03 PM

ronaprhys: jso2897:Ah, so it's a matter of numbers. What percentage or number of people is require for the comfort someone might feel at seeing the symbol of their religion displayed to become legitimate, in your view?

That doesn't follow from what I wrote.  Try again.


someone else you are unable to understand.
 
2013-03-30 09:30:04 PM

jcooli09: ronaprhys: jso2897:Ah, so it's a matter of numbers. What percentage or number of people is require for the comfort someone might feel at seeing the symbol of their religion displayed to become legitimate, in your view?

That doesn't follow from what I wrote.  Try again.

someone else you are unable to understand.


You aren't particularly clever, you know that?  Shouldn't you be throwing a tantrum that there's a church in your town?
 
2013-03-30 09:30:50 PM

EvilRacistNaziFascist: Man On Pink Corner: Sorry, but we have the right to defend our society from the corrosive effects of superstition.  Deal with it, and get over it.

Some of the "corrosive effects" of Christianity have included great works of art, extensive charitable endeavours, and moral campaigns such as the abolition of slavery in the British Empire. You can't indict religion for the bad things done in its name while throwing out the good things: that is hypocrisy. Besides, when it comes to slaughter the Christians were amateurs compared to those following the avowedly atheist totalitarian system of Communism, whose death toll has amounted to upward of eighty million in one century alone (and they didn't even produce an equivalent to Bach, Michelangelo, or Dante).

The problem is not with religion as such but with man's propensity to hold irrational beliefs and to want to use them to dominate his neighbours, and this can also manifest itself in secular ways: political ideologies serve the same purpose for most people nowadays as faith did for our ancestors. You only have to read a political discussion on Fark to see how many commenters around here treat politics as a substitute religion giving their lives meaning, and with its own corresponding ideas of original sin (white guilt), the lost paradise (the pre- industrial and/or tribal and/or aboriginal and/or matriarchal way of life), the division of humanity into the saved and damned (those who are part of the problem (conservatives) and those who are part of the solution(left- liberals)), and the promised utopia of the future that will arrive once the enemies of goodness have been gotten out of the way (a carbon- free future, perhaps, a de-industrialized world, a one- world government, or whatever else strikes their fancy). Much like Christians, too, politically- minded people tend to lash out viciously at those who question their dogma: and if you doubt it, just watch the replies to this post!



That was beautiful. Well said.

I especially agree with your observations on the supplanting of the dogma of religion with those of political ideologies and science*, and would add that academia has become the new "priest class" in our evolving secular culture. Those who disagree with or question the enshrined tenets are treated as heretics and shunned, and the majority of people will simply accept whatever they are told and sing the hymns *without question*, as doing otherwise can have very real negative consequences in their daily lives.

Yet another area you touched on are the social taboos - certain ideas or opinions that one must avoid even the APPEARANCE of contemplating lest they be accused of neo-Blasphemy -  a "sin" that can and has ruined lives, careers, and condemned the "sinner" to hell on Earth.

Funny, but it seems we really haven't changed all that much. We've just swapped out old sins and objects of reverence for new.

The really sad part is that the masses are still being manipulated / controlled by the elite classes, only where once they rallied in the name of God / Religion, they now dogmatically swear allegiance to the recognized leaders of their chosen political ideology.

But one thing hasn't changed: Money is still King of Kings, and Lord of Lords.


*Pure science (absent the greed and ego and ulterior motives of the scientist), is a beautiful thing, but it is rarely (if ever) found in its pure form
 
2013-03-30 09:31:41 PM

the ha ha guy: jso2897: So, if putting a Muslim Crescent in that museum would make somebody feel better, you'd still be against it? It's my understanding that there are Muslims who lost loved ones in 9/11 - don't they deserve to feel better? I think everybody deserves to feel better. History, after all, is a matter of opinion, and is generally written by the winners.


Was there a crescent found that became an icon of hope in the Muslim world? If so, then it should be included. If not, then it's only adding objects and stories where none existed, and would discredit the historical value of the museum as a whole.


To me, the fact that it made people feel better would be more important than somebody's narrative that they choose to call "history" - but then, I care about how more about  people being happy than I do about being "right".
But what do I know? This is why I think people like the "American Atheists" are assholes, and why I resent their presuming to speak for me. But I guess religious people have to deal with assholes presuming to speak for them all the time too, so I can't expect a free pass.
To me, if the point of this "museum" is to do anything but give people - all people - hope and comfort of some kind, I don't care about it anyway. Ford was right - "history" is bunk. It's a fairy tale, written by the winners.
 
2013-03-30 09:33:43 PM

ronaprhys: jcooli09: ronaprhys: jso2897:Ah, so it's a matter of numbers. What percentage or number of people is require for the comfort someone might feel at seeing the symbol of their religion displayed to become legitimate, in your view?

That doesn't follow from what I wrote.  Try again.

someone else you are unable to understand.

You aren't particularly clever, you know that?  Shouldn't you be throwing a tantrum that there's a church in your town?


Ah, so now you are going to start telling people they are dumb because they don't agree with you? Somebody takes himself a little too seriously, methinks.
 
2013-03-30 09:37:06 PM

jso2897: Ah, so now you are going to start telling people they are dumb because they don't agree with you? Somebody takes himself a little too seriously, methinks.


No - just this particular guy.  I can be goofy about it and joke.  He's taking it way too seriously and I'm having a spot of fun calling him out on his idiocy.  It's an amusing diversion on a slow Saturday night.

Not much different than what you're doing, methinks.  Just with a different target.
 
2013-03-30 09:37:09 PM
Well, atheists - best get busy gutting the Metropolitan Museum of Art, if you'd like to be consistent. The place is crammed with religious imagery all in your face and shiat.
 
2013-03-30 09:41:20 PM

Amos Quito: hell on Earth.


Having to jump from a skyscraper just to have one last breath of freedom, knowing they will win.
 
2013-03-30 09:41:47 PM

jso2897: To me, the fact that it made people feel better would be more important than somebody's narrative that they choose to call "history" - but then, I care about how more about  people being happy than I do about being "right".



If it made people feel better at the time, then it would have a valid historical significance. But as of today there is no known evidence that such an object existed, therefore including one would be invented history for no other purpose than to pander to emotions at the cost of destroying history.
 
2013-03-30 09:44:43 PM

ronaprhys: jso2897: Ah, so now you are going to start telling people they are dumb because they don't agree with you? Somebody takes himself a little too seriously, methinks.

No - just this particular guy.  I can be goofy about it and joke.  He's taking it way too seriously and I'm having a spot of fun calling him out on his idiocy.  It's an amusing diversion on a slow Saturday night.

Not much different than what you're doing, methinks.  Just with a different target.


I don't think anyone here is an idiot, and I'm not calling anybody out. And maybe I don't know what I am talking about, but I think that the whole point of both museums like this, and religious symbols, is to give people some kind of comfort.
Let's say, for example, that some Muslim kid lost their dad in one of the towers, and seeing a Crescent in that museum would make him feel better.  If it was up to me, I'd do what made him feel better.
That's  a real thing, to me. I'd put all the symbols up, if it helped somebody.
Which, in turn, is why people like "American Atheists" don't speak for me, heathen though I be.
I've been told I'm a really crappy atheist, though. I don't fail to believe in God hard enough, apparently.
 
2013-03-30 09:46:08 PM

the ha ha guy: therefore including one would be invented history for no other purpose than to pander to emotions at the cost of destroying history.


You say that like it's a bad thing.
 
2013-03-30 09:48:11 PM

Nutsac_Jim: Amos Quito: FTA: "September 11 "affected all Americans, not just Christians," Silverman continued. "We will not sit and let the 500 atheists who died on 9/11 go unnoticed."


How does Silverman know how many atheists died on 9/11?

Were they registered atheists?

Did someone reject the atheist gravestone?



17. "And he [Jesus] beheld them, and said, What is this then that is written, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner?

18. "Whosoever shall fall upon that stone shall be broken; but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder."

Luke 20:17-18 KJV


Apropos?

;-)
 
2013-03-30 09:49:34 PM

jso2897: I don't think anyone here is an idiot, and I'm not calling anybody out. And maybe I don't know what I am talking about, but I think that the whole point of both museums like this, and religious symbols, is to give people some kind of comfort.
Let's say, for example, that some Muslim kid lost their dad in one of the towers, and seeing a Crescent in that museum would make him feel better.  If it was up to me, I'd do what made him feel better.
That's  a real thing, to me. I'd put all the symbols up, if it helped somebody.
Which, in turn, is why people like "American Atheists" don't speak for me, heathen though I be.
I've been told I'm a really crappy atheist, though. I don't fail to believe in God hard enough, apparently.


True - you're not calling anyone an idiot.  You are, however, messing with folks to amuse yourself.  Which is similar to the game I'm playing.  The difference here is one of tactics, more than anything.  jcoolio has put himself out there and is basically being a dick for no good reason whatsoever.  I called him on it, pointed out the flaws in his nonsense, etc.  Willful ignorance, under whatever guise, should be called out for what it is.
 
2013-03-30 09:51:43 PM

ecmoRandomNumbers: violentsalvation: I bet the heat and kinetic energy of the collapse left some mangled steel beams strewn about like a spaghetti monster.

The problem with pastafarianism is that it doesn't have its own city. No Mecca, Jerusalem, Vatican, or Salt Lake City. You have to have a city if you want to be a legitimate religion.


Farkers, the gauntlet has been thrown down.  The city most associated with noodley culture must be designated as the holy city of Pastafarianism.  Nominations?
 
2013-03-30 09:51:46 PM

jso2897: the ha ha guy: therefore including one would be invented history for no other purpose than to pander to emotions at the cost of destroying history.

You say that like it's a bad thing.



"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" ~ George Santayana
 
2013-03-30 09:51:48 PM

Gulper Eel: Well, atheists - best get busy gutting the Metropolitan Museum of Art, if you'd like to be consistent. The place is crammed with religious imagery all in your face and shiat.


The Metropolitan Museum of Art is a private entity. The 9/11 Memorial and Museum is a public one.
 
2013-03-30 09:54:56 PM

Mugato: Jesus Christ, atheists can be assholes.


Let's stick a 9-11 crescent and star in there (plenty of Muslims died in the attacks) and see who the assholes are.

For the record, I don't care about any of it. None of it means anything. People will continue to kill each other, and shriek about their rights, and the other guys are assholes, until there are no more people.

None of it ever means anything. They thought it meant something when they tore Hippolyta apart with their bare hands in the name of god. It didn't.

It never does.
 
2013-03-30 09:55:24 PM

advex101: ecmoRandomNumbers: violentsalvation: I bet the heat and kinetic energy of the collapse left some mangled steel beams strewn about like a spaghetti monster.

The problem with pastafarianism is that it doesn't have its own city. No Mecca, Jerusalem, Vatican, or Salt Lake City. You have to have a city if you want to be a legitimate religion.

Farkers, the gauntlet has been thrown down.  The city most associated with noodley culture must be designated as the holy city of Pastafarianism.  Nominations?


Noodly culture?  Roma?  Firenze?
 
2013-03-30 09:56:04 PM

jaytkay: Gulper Eel: Well, atheists - best get busy gutting the Metropolitan Museum of Art, if you'd like to be consistent. The place is crammed with religious imagery all in your face and shiat.

The Metropolitan Museum of Art is a private entity. The 9/11 Memorial and Museum is a public one.


Just substitute the National Gallery of Art, as an easy one. It's really not hard to get his point.
 
2013-03-30 09:58:59 PM

ronaprhys: jso2897: I don't think anyone here is an idiot, and I'm not calling anybody out. And maybe I don't know what I am talking about, but I think that the whole point of both museums like this, and religious symbols, is to give people some kind of comfort.
Let's say, for example, that some Muslim kid lost their dad in one of the towers, and seeing a Crescent in that museum would make him feel better.  If it was up to me, I'd do what made him feel better.
That's  a real thing, to me. I'd put all the symbols up, if it helped somebody.
Which, in turn, is why people like "American Atheists" don't speak for me, heathen though I be.
I've been told I'm a really crappy atheist, though. I don't fail to believe in God hard enough, apparently.

True - you're not calling anyone an idiot.  You are, however, messing with folks to amuse yourself.  Which is similar to the game I'm playing.  The difference here is one of tactics, more than anything.  jcoolio has put himself out there and is basically being a dick for no good reason whatsoever.  I called him on it, pointed out the flaws in his nonsense, etc.  Willful ignorance, under whatever guise, should be called out for what it is.


Hey - maybe being a dick gives him hope, and comfort. Anyway, I'm not "messing with" anybody - I just get tired of mean people wanting to deprive others of things that make them feel better because it conflicts with their version of the "truth". The term "historical accuracy" is an oxymoron, and holding it up as a value that trumps anybody's happiness is something I don't agree with. I apply this to self-styled atheists who want to piss on religious folks happiness, and I apply it to religious folk who would do the same.
"History" is a toothless old dotard sitting around the campfire telling tales to the children, and his story changes with every telling. People being happy matters more than the "accuracy" of his mumbled narrative, in my value system.
 
2013-03-30 10:00:37 PM

the ha ha guy: jso2897: the ha ha guy: therefore including one would be invented history for no other purpose than to pander to emotions at the cost of destroying history.

You say that like it's a bad thing.


"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" ~ George Santayana


In my observation, so are those who can.
 
2013-03-30 10:08:36 PM

YoOjo: /agnostic, because atheism is too much like having a belief.


I'm agnostic for a different reason, (since the concept of "having a belief" isn't inherently bad in and of itself).

However I completely agree with the sentiment.  Anyone who acts or does, or actively avoids acting or doing, based on their theological stance (either positive or negative) has belief.  This is self-evident and inherently obvious.
 
2013-03-30 10:09:31 PM

jso2897: The term "historical accuracy" is an oxymoron, and holding it up as a value that trumps anybody's happiness is something I don't agree with.



Should the Holocaust museums be redecorated and the stories revised to make the museums a place of joy? After all, if they stay as-is, their "accuracy" in telling the story of 12+ million people murdered would stifle my right to be happy during my visit to the museum.
 
2013-03-30 10:11:11 PM

jso2897: ronaprhys: jso2897: I don't think anyone here is an idiot, and I'm not calling anybody out. And maybe I don't know what I am talking about, but I think that the whole point of both museums like this, and religious symbols, is to give people some kind of comfort.
Let's say, for example, that some Muslim kid lost their dad in one of the towers, and seeing a Crescent in that museum would make him feel better.  If it was up to me, I'd do what made him feel better.
That's  a real thing, to me. I'd put all the symbols up, if it helped somebody.
Which, in turn, is why people like "American Atheists" don't speak for me, heathen though I be.
I've been told I'm a really crappy atheist, though. I don't fail to believe in God hard enough, apparently.

True - you're not calling anyone an idiot.  You are, however, messing with folks to amuse yourself.  Which is similar to the game I'm playing.  The difference here is one of tactics, more than anything.  jcoolio has put himself out there and is basically being a dick for no good reason whatsoever.  I called him on it, pointed out the flaws in his nonsense, etc.  Willful ignorance, under whatever guise, should be called out for what it is.

Hey - maybe being a dick gives him hope, and comfort. Anyway, I'm not "messing with" anybuody - I just get tired of mean people wanting to deprive others of things that make them feel better because it conflicts with their version of the "truth". The term "historical accuracy" is an oxymoron, and holding it up as a value that trumps anybody's happiness is something I don't agree with. I apply this to self-styled atheists who want to piss on religious folks happiness, and I apply it to religious folk who would do the same.
"History" is a toothless old dotard sitting around the campfire telling tales to the children, and his story changes with every telling. People being happy matters more than the "accuracy" of his mumbled narrative, in my value system.


I dunno.  Historical accuracy is an ideal to shoot for.  I think that you're referring more to the interpretation of historical facts more than anything.  As folks have noted here, and in many other places, one is entitled to one's opinion, just not their own facts.

As for whether or not an accurate representation of historical events and facts offends someone, to me, that's irrelevant.  Just because facts may offend someone is no good reason to hide them, or mix them up with other things to help comfort others.  To me, it's not much different than science.  Based on the best available information, science will hold a thing as true.  If, however, additional facts come along and change that - science changes and adapts to incorporate those facts.  It doesn't matter than certain professors and other academia don't want to be proven wrong.
 
2013-03-30 10:13:32 PM

thisisyourbrainonFark: theotherles: REO-Weedwagon: [2.bp.blogspot.com image 344x400]

Let the cross stand as a monument to the question every Jesus-worshiper avoids: Where was your omnipotent, all-powerful, all-loving Jesus when 3,000 people were murdered?

F*CK YES!

Where was your God over the last century when over a hundred million people were murdered by various so-called governments?
]

Sweet deities on pogosticks (or emptiness on a pogostick) that image is more frightening than Newt Gingrich reenacting Lemon Party with Dick Cheney
 
2013-03-30 10:17:03 PM
Good god, as an atheist, this crap pisses me off.
 
2013-03-30 10:19:28 PM

WI241TH: "We are confident that we will eventually win this case and that cross will be removed, or atheists will be allowed to have our own symbol in there," he said.

Why wasn't this the main goal in the first place?  It's an historical artifact and I have no problem with it being displayed in the museum so long as they're not denying all other symbols.


Like...maybe...this symbol?

//3====D  0:<
 
2013-03-30 10:21:48 PM

ecmoRandomNumbers: violentsalvation: I bet the heat and kinetic energy of the collapse left some mangled steel beams strewn about like a spaghetti monster.

The problem with pastafarianism is that it doesn't have its own city. No Mecca, Jerusalem, Vatican, or Salt Lake City. You have to have a city if you want to be a legitimate religion.


Who needs a city when you have the entire island of Sicily?
 
2013-03-30 10:29:46 PM

AAlumni: Good god, as an atheist, this crap pisses me off.



Apparently Silverman and his American Atheists Association are to atheists as LaPierre and his National Rifle Association are to gun owners:


A MAJOR PAIN IN THE ASS.

Of course I don't own any atheists, and I don't believe in guns, so I can't be absolutely sure...
 
2013-03-30 10:30:35 PM

ModernLuddite: God:

Did not prevent the attacks, resulting deaths, and resulting war(s), and deaths.

Did make his symbol appear in the rubble.


...I don't recall seeing a crescent in the rubble.
 
2013-03-30 10:30:56 PM

Gulper Eel: Well, atheists - best get busy gutting the Metropolitan Museum of Art, if you'd like to be consistent. The place is crammed with religious imagery all in your face and shiat.


Does the Metropolitan Museum of Art receive government funding for religious exhibits?  If so, then yes, someone should call bullshiat.
 
2013-03-30 10:32:51 PM
What's the big deal? Museums are full of religious artifacts.
 
2013-03-30 10:37:58 PM

REO-Weedwagon: [2.bp.blogspot.com image 344x400]

Let the cross stand as a monument to the question every Jesus-worshiper avoids: Where was your omnipotent, all-powerful, all-loving Jesus when 3,000 people were murdered?


In Heaven, of course. He got there after teaching mankind the sort of lessons we would need to avoid such tragedies. Of course, most don't listen, despite the fact that said teachings are applicable to a good number of life situations, whether you're Christian or not.
 
2013-03-30 10:40:44 PM

the ha ha guy: jso2897: The term "historical accuracy" is an oxymoron, and holding it up as a value that trumps anybody's happiness is something I don't agree with.


Should the Holocaust museums be redecorated and the stories revised to make the museums a place of joy? After all, if they stay as-is, their "accuracy" in telling the story of 12+ million people murdered would stifle my right to be happy during my visit to the museum.

i18.photobucket.com
Would it make ya feel better, little goil, if they'd been shoved outta windows?
 
2013-03-30 10:41:28 PM

wiredroach: load-bearing structures perpendicular to the force of gravity is the strongest and most efficient method of construction.


Excuse me, sir, but you have a call from "geodesic dome."
 
2013-03-30 10:44:13 PM

MontanaDave: wiredroach: load-bearing structures perpendicular to the force of gravity is the strongest and most efficient method of construction.

Excuse me, sir, but you have a call from "geodesic dome."


And you, sir, have a phone call from Lexington Steele, who is currently holding up the world with his member right now.
 
2013-03-30 10:48:34 PM

jaytkay: The Metropolitan Museum of Art is a private entity.


Irrelevant. The City of New York owns the land and facilities and pitches in a big chunk of its operating budget. They receive all kinds of other taxpayer subsidies as well.

The only difference is that American Atheists can raise money whargarbling about the 9/11 cross, but if they were THAT offended by a cross...they would, if they were consistent, completely lose their shiat at the Met. There's Christian stuff, Islamic art, Jewish art, Greek and Roman art with gods all over the place, African religious imagery...chrissakes, the museum even has a temple built inside it. It's temple dedicated to Isis and Osiris, but still.

Maybe if they averted their eyes until they got to the cafeteria.
 
2013-03-30 10:49:54 PM

Man On Pink Corner: Gulper Eel: Well, atheists - best get busy gutting the Metropolitan Museum of Art, if you'd like to be consistent. The place is crammed with religious imagery all in your face and shiat.

Does the Metropolitan Museum of Art receive government funding for religious exhibits?  If so, then yes, someone should call bullshiat.


i18.photobucket.com
Like this, you mean?
 
2013-03-30 10:50:59 PM
Federal Judge Deborah Batts of the Southern District of New York ruled Thursday that display of the beams is permissible because they bear historical importance.

Child molestation has been an important historically to the Catholic church too.
 
2013-03-30 10:51:49 PM

jso2897: Would it make ya feel better, little goil, if they'd been shoved outta windows?


In case you've forgotten, YOU were the one arguing that historical accuracy should be ignored in favor of making people happy. I'm only trying to determine how much history you're willing to destroy to achieve happiness.
 
2013-03-30 10:52:38 PM

Gulper Eel: jaytkay: The Metropolitan Museum of Art is a private entity.

Irrelevant. The City of New York owns the land and facilities and pitches in a big chunk of its operating budget. They receive all kinds of other taxpayer subsidies as well.

The only difference is that American Atheists can raise money whargarbling about the 9/11 cross, but if they were THAT offended by a cross...they would, if they were consistent, completely lose their shiat at the Met. There's Christian stuff, Islamic art, Jewish art, Greek and Roman art with gods all over the place, African religious imagery...chrissakes, the museum even has a temple built inside it. It's temple dedicated to Isis and Osiris, but still.

Maybe if they averted their eyes until they got to the cafeteria.


"American Atheists" speak for atheists like Fred Phelps speaks for Christians. People who take the attitude that they are "typical atheists" are as intellectually honest as people who refer to Phelps as a "typical Christian".
 
2013-03-30 10:53:49 PM

Summer Glau's Love Slave: 3000+ people dead and a cross gets jabbed on top of the rubble?

God's just trolling us at this point.

/3000+ folks escaping certain death would have been a REAL miracle.
//Just sayin'


Like they did in the first WTC bombing in 1993?

/well, that wasn't a miracle, that was just stoopid terrorists
//seems they weren't that stupid though... maybe you were just too ungrateful
 
2013-03-30 10:54:19 PM
Dear Believers,

                        Don't group me in with asshole atheists, and I will (mostly) remember not to automatically group you in with Believer asshats.

   xoxo,
           Lady Indica

PS: It's a good deal, there's a lot more asshat believers, just because there are more believers overall. ;)
 
2013-03-30 10:56:49 PM
I really enjoyed that, I think I'm going to have to create an alt.

Thanks!
 
2013-03-30 10:57:56 PM

the ha ha guy: jso2897: Would it make ya feel better, little goil, if they'd been shoved outta windows?

In case you've forgotten, YOU were the one arguing that historical accuracy should be ignored in favor of making people happy. I'm only trying to determine how much history you're willing to destroy to achieve happiness.


None. History can be neither created nor destroyed. It isn't a real thing - it's a story people tell.
Human suffering, hope, joy - to me those are real things. Please don't be upset with me for not thinking what you think is important isn't - it's not like I have a choice in the matter. Just write it off as some guy being wrong on the Internet, and shine it on - I'm not important, and what I think shouldn't matter to you.
 
2013-03-30 10:59:19 PM

halfof33: Anti-theist zealots.


Just ignore them - like all us cool heathens do.
 
2013-03-30 10:59:59 PM

jso2897: the ha ha guy: jso2897: the ha ha guy: therefore including one would be invented history for no other purpose than to pander to emotions at the cost of destroying history.

You say that like it's a bad thing.


"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" ~ George Santayana

In my observation, so are those who can.


That's because they don't learn from it.  Churchill paraphrased Santayana to make that point.
 
2013-03-30 11:01:58 PM

jso2897: "History" is a toothless old dotard sitting around the campfire telling tales to the children, and his story changes with every telling.



Isn't that how religion starts?

History: Someone once said "try being nice to one another for a change".
First retelling: A magician who could turn water into wine once said "try being nice to one another for a change".
Second retelling: A powerful magician who could bring people back from the dead once said that if you obey his rules you'll get to live forever in his magic happy fun land.
Third retelling: A powerful magician who died, came back from the dead, and flew away, once said that if you get other people to obey his rules you'll get to live forever in his sky palace in the clouds.
[...]
Medieval retelling: God said that if you help us torture heretics you'll get to live forever in heaven.
 
2013-03-30 11:05:22 PM

Gulper Eel: jaytkay: The Metropolitan Museum of Art is a private entity.

Irrelevant. The City of New York owns the land and facilities and pitches in a big chunk of its operating budget. They receive all kinds of other taxpayer subsidies as well.

The only difference is that American Atheists can raise money whargarbling about the 9/11 cross, but if they were THAT offended by a cross...they would, if they were consistent, completely lose their shiat at the Met. There's Christian stuff, Islamic art, Jewish art, Greek and Roman art with gods all over the place, African religious imagery...chrissakes, the museum even has a temple built inside it. It's temple dedicated to Isis and Osiris, but still.

Maybe if they averted their eyes until they got to the cafeteria.


And that's just the Met.

Wait until they find out about the Survivors' Talmud... printed by none other than the US Government.

/as a Christian, I feel like I'm having Judaism shoved down my throat...
//wait, no I don't.
 
2013-03-30 11:06:39 PM

the ha ha guy: jso2897: "History" is a toothless old dotard sitting around the campfire telling tales to the children, and his story changes with every telling.


Isn't that how religion starts?

History: Someone once said "try being nice to one another for a change".
First retelling: A magician who could turn water into wine once said "try being nice to one another for a change".
Second retelling: A powerful magician who could bring people back from the dead once said that if you obey his rules you'll get to live forever in his magic happy fun land.
Third retelling: A powerful magician who died, came back from the dead, and flew away, once said that if you get other people to obey his rules you'll get to live forever in his sky palace in the clouds.
[...]
Medieval retelling: God said that if you help us torture heretics you'll get to live forever in heaven.


Yep. That's how "history" starts, too. That's why I don't believe in either one, and wouldn't deny anyone anything that makes them happy on the basis of either one.
See? We're in total agreement.
 
2013-03-30 11:09:29 PM

ReverendJynxed: eraser8: Mugato: Jesus Christ, atheists can be assholes.

Any person can be an asshole.

Christians can be assholes.

Muslims can be assholes.

Hindus can be assholes.

Drinkers can be assholes.

Teetotalers can be assholes.

Men can be assholes.

Women can be assholes.

Hell, you don't even need to be human to be an asshole.  I know some ducks who are complete (metaphorical) jackasses.

Yeah, we won't even get started on geese. Those bastards wrote the book.


I'll add chickens to the mix. They read to book the geese wrote.
 
2013-03-30 11:09:45 PM

BarkingUnicorn: jso2897: the ha ha guy: jso2897: the ha ha guy: therefore including one would be invented history for no other purpose than to pander to emotions at the cost of destroying history.

You say that like it's a bad thing.


"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" ~ George Santayana

In my observation, so are those who can.

That's because they don't learn from it.  Churchill paraphrased Santayana to make that point.


Precisely my point.
Of course, Churchill was also paraphrasing him when he said "I've got a black magic woman, and she's trying to make a demon out of me."
 
2013-03-30 11:12:17 PM

jso2897: the ha ha guy: jso2897: Would it make ya feel better, little goil, if they'd been shoved outta windows?

In case you've forgotten, YOU were the one arguing that historical accuracy should be ignored in favor of making people happy. I'm only trying to determine how much history you're willing to destroy to achieve happiness.

None. History can be neither created nor destroyed. It isn't a real thing - it's a story people tell.
Human suffering, hope, joy - to me those are real things. Please don't be upset with me for not thinking what you think is important isn't - it's not like I have a choice in the matter. Just write it off as some guy being wrong on the Internet, and shine it on - I'm not important, and what I think shouldn't matter to you.



And I'm just another wrong guy on the internet who has nothing better to do on a Saturday night, so why do you care that I'm passing the time on Fark instead of watching TV or sitting on the toilet?

But in response to your post, altering proven historical facts to push a "happiness" agenda is no different than altering proven scientific facts to push a religious agenda.

If you want a version of reality that fits with your ideal but is backed up with zero facts, there are literally hundreds of sources for it. But don't try claiming that your ideal reality should be the default one.
 
2013-03-30 11:17:50 PM
Is this a government sponsored venture? Kinda had to tell from the web site.
 
2013-03-30 11:23:22 PM

jso2897: Yep. That's how "history" starts, too. That's why I don't believe in either one, and wouldn't deny anyone anything that makes them happy on the basis of either one.
See? We're in total agreement.



What I want is to see factual accounts backed by physical evidence without interference from myths or false evidence.

What you want to see is myths and false evidence added to the official story just to make a terrible tragedy seem happier than it really was.

Since your desire inherently excludes my desire, we are not in agreement.
 
2013-03-30 11:23:37 PM

firefly212: Having the 9/11 cross in a museum is no more of an endorsement of religion than having whips and chains in a museum is an endorsement of slavery.


Nice move. Very nice.
 
2013-03-30 11:23:59 PM

the ha ha guy: jso2897: the ha ha guy: jso2897: Would it make ya feel better, little goil, if they'd been shoved outta windows?

In case you've forgotten, YOU were the one arguing that historical accuracy should be ignored in favor of making people happy. I'm only trying to determine how much history you're willing to destroy to achieve happiness.

None. History can be neither created nor destroyed. It isn't a real thing - it's a story people tell.
Human suffering, hope, joy - to me those are real things. Please don't be upset with me for not thinking what you think is important isn't - it's not like I have a choice in the matter. Just write it off as some guy being wrong on the Internet, and shine it on - I'm not important, and what I think shouldn't matter to you.


And I'm just another wrong guy on the internet who has nothing better to do on a Saturday night, so why do you care that I'm passing the time on Fark instead of watching TV or sitting on the toilet?

But in response to your post, altering proven historical facts to push a "happiness" agenda is no different than altering proven scientific facts to push a religious agenda.

If you want a version of reality that fits with your ideal but is backed up with zero facts, there are literally hundreds of sources for it. But don't try claiming that your ideal reality should be the default one.


I'm not. But to me, the function of religious symbols is to bring hope and comfort to the faithful. That, in MY value system, is more important that treating the equivalent of some people seeing Jesus' face in a grilled cheese sandwich as a "proven historical fact". But I'm not saying you're "wrong" - you just appear to have a different value system than I do - neither one of us has to be "right" or "wrong" I never said my reality should be the "default" one, nor do I believe that it should.
 
2013-03-30 11:25:54 PM

the ha ha guy: jso2897: Yep. That's how "history" starts, too. That's why I don't believe in either one, and wouldn't deny anyone anything that makes them happy on the basis of either one.
See? We're in total agreement.


What I want is to see factual accounts backed by physical evidence without interference from myths or false evidence.

What you want to see is myths and false evidence added to the official story just to make a terrible tragedy seem happier than it really was.

Since your desire inherently excludes my desire, we are not in agreement.


Well, I agree with you, even if you don't agree with me. I'm easy.
 
2013-03-30 11:30:04 PM

Man On Pink Corner: Does the Metropolitan Museum of Art receive government funding for religious exhibits?


Indeed they do. Here's one.

Even the State Department got involved.
 
2013-03-30 11:33:25 PM

MontanaDave: wiredroach: load-bearing structures perpendicular to the force of gravity is the strongest and most efficient method of construction.

Excuse me, sir, but you have a call from "geodesic dome."


Yeah, look at all those metropolises built from domes. It's clearly a winner.
 
2013-03-30 11:37:12 PM

halfof33: Anti-theist zealots.



Anti-theists are the antithesis of theists.


/Swear to God
 
2013-03-30 11:39:33 PM

Amos Quito: halfof33: Anti-theist zealots.


Anti-theists are the antithesis of theists.


/Swear to God


That sentence made my head hurt.

You're a meanie.
 
2013-03-30 11:45:33 PM

jso2897: I'm not. But to me, the function of religious symbols is to bring hope and comfort to the faithful. That, in MY value system, is more important that treating the equivalent of some people seeing Jesus' face in a grilled cheese sandwich as a "proven historical fact".



The shape of the metal is irrelevant, it could have been a PETA logo for all I care. What makes it historically significant is the story around it and the fact that it became a national icon.


jso2897: I never said my reality should be the "default" one, nor do I believe that it should.



You said that a crescent should be added to the museum anyway, despite the fact that there are no known historically significant crescent shaped pieces of rubble. You're arguing that if something makes people happy, happiness should trump accuracy.

So yes, it does appear that you want to add false stories to the official repository of history and evidence about the event.
 
2013-03-30 11:47:57 PM

Vangor: Wonder what this symbol would be? I know American Atheists have a symbol, but I do not know what connection this would have to the events of September 11th. He appears to be missing the point.



A fine example of becoming what you hate.  Next I bet they'll start wearing some really odd hats.
 
2013-03-30 11:48:20 PM
The difference between atheists and anti-theists is well demonstrated in this thread.
 
2013-03-30 11:50:58 PM

Vangor: I do not understand why legal battles such as this would infuriate anyone. The NAACP and AA are not elected officials and are working in a transparent manner within the scope of current laws to establish legal interpretation. What should infuriate everyone is when elected officials attempt to subvert the system away from public views to impose religious belief or lack of belief on others.


Maybe I missed it but aside from erecting icons in public spaces, which is by no means an exclusively Christian activity, how has the system been subverted in order to "impose" religious beliefs on others and force them to participate in religious rites?
 
2013-03-31 12:33:09 AM
hey, if people want to fight over a graven image, let them.
 
2013-03-31 12:34:08 AM
From the NYT:


Judge Batts wrote that the cross and its accompanying panels of text helped "demonstrate how those at ground zero coped with the devastation they witnessed." She called its purpose "historical and secular," and noted that it would be in the "Finding Meaning at Ground Zero" section of the museum, with placards explaining its meaning and the reason for its inclusion.


"No reasonable observer would view the artifact as endorsing Christianity," the judge said. She added, "The cross does not create excessive entanglement between the state and religion." She said the plaintiffs also failed to find any form of intentional discrimination or cite any adverse or unequal treatment on the basis of their religious beliefs.
 
2013-03-31 12:58:11 AM
As an agnostic I'm no more bothered by this than I am by the many paintings of jesus and other biblical figures hanging in the publicly funded museums around the country. Acknowledging that their are Christians in our society is not the same as forcing their views upon anyone. I'm infinitely more worried about things of substance like creationist teachings instead of science or DOMA or the influence of silly religious groups on alcohol and other adult activites.
 
2013-03-31 01:29:56 AM

nekom: Pick your battles, people.  This just isn't one worth fighting, on either side really.  Creationism being taught in science class?  BIG problem there.  This?  Blech, who cares?


Hey you're right because believing that one religion was better than another played absolutely no part in the entire reason that all those people died on 9/11 right? We should totally memorialize "our" religion even though it's clear "we" don't have one, but many. It would only be fair after we've demonized "their" religion and even suggested it isn't actually a religion.

Religion was the prime cause of 9/11, not giving equal weight to each religion was the secondary cause. Let's go ahead and demonize one religion while we memorialize another though. That is totally not an issue and is beneath our collective notice.

Here's another idea, how about we spank every naughty little girl and boy who thinks that their imaginary friend is better than everyone else's and make them all sit in time out when they instigate shiat like this. We can't ever be free until we treat everyone's silly superstitions the same. Some might say we can't ever really be free until we treat everyone with silly superstitions like the idiots they are. I would be one of those.
 
2013-03-31 01:37:35 AM

robodog: I'm infinitely more worried about things of substance like creationist teachings instead of science or DOMA or the influence of silly religious groups on alcohol and other adult activites.



I agree on the issue of teaching scientifically falsifiable ideas in public schools.  However on moral issues like alcohol and adult activities, I have to disagree.   Every individual should have equal say in the shaping of public policy.  No one should be marginalized because you personally don't like the reasons by which they arrived at their opinions.  Religious people aren't the only ones who frown upon your adult activities.  "Silly" feminist groups for example think you shouldn't look at porn or go to strip clubs.  I no more think feminists should be disenfranchised from society for their beliefs, than religious people should be for theirs.
 
2013-03-31 01:46:51 AM
I'm just waiting for the first militant atheist mass shooter.  One of them has to crack and waste a Sunday school.

/Whew, close one. Almost used "lanza" as a verb.
 
2013-03-31 01:58:09 AM
It's a symbol of a grave.

"The whole point of being an atheist is not giving a crap".
-atheist Adam Carolla on militant atheists
 
2013-03-31 01:59:45 AM

BarkingUnicorn: I'm just waiting for the first militant atheist mass shooter.  One of them has to crack and waste a Sunday school.

/Whew, close one. Almost used "lanza" as a verb.


Stalin didn't kill enough for you?
 
2013-03-31 02:01:45 AM

BarkingUnicorn: I'm just waiting for the first militant atheist mass shooter.  One of them has to crack and waste a Sunday school.

/Whew, close one. Almost used "lanza" as a verb.


Hey, Mao just brought in his kill list too. This should make you happy :)
 
2013-03-31 02:03:10 AM
Pol Pot says give me a chance bro!
 
2013-03-31 02:12:35 AM

muck4doo: BarkingUnicorn: I'm just waiting for the first militant atheist mass shooter.  One of them has to crack and waste a Sunday school.

/Whew, close one. Almost used "lanza" as a verb.

Stalin didn't kill enough for you?


Oh, all right... the first U. S. militant atheist shooter who wastes a Sunday school.

Of this century, just to cover my bases.
 
2013-03-31 02:28:10 AM

Amos Quito: FTA: "September 11 "affected all Americans, not just Christians," Silverman continued. "We will not sit and let the 500 atheists who died on 9/11 go unnoticed."


How does Silverman know how many atheists died on 9/11?

Were they registered atheists?


Not the problem. See, the problem is that if they put a cross in the 9/11 museum, any atheists who died on 9/11 will be retroactively erased from the time-space continuum.
 
2013-03-31 02:28:44 AM

BarkingUnicorn: muck4doo: BarkingUnicorn: I'm just waiting for the first militant atheist mass shooter.  One of them has to crack and waste a Sunday school.

/Whew, close one. Almost used "lanza" as a verb.

Stalin didn't kill enough for you?

Oh, all right... the first U. S. militant atheist shooter who wastes a Sunday school.

Of this century, just to cover my bases.


Why stop there? Only the first U. S. militant atheist shooter who wastes a Sunday school while wearing a pink tutu and wearing a bowl of spaghetti on his head should count.

/since most schools are closed on Sunday, and the ones that are open aren't technically "schools" but rather extensions of church services, might as well make it clear that you really don't intend for any incident to match the criteria at all
 
2013-03-31 02:32:29 AM

Sensei Can You See: Amos Quito: FTA: "September 11 "affected all Americans, not just Christians," Silverman continued. "We will not sit and let the 500 atheists who died on 9/11 go unnoticed."


How does Silverman know how many atheists died on 9/11?

Were they registered atheists?

Not the problem. See, the problem is that if they put a cross in the 9/11 museum, any atheists who died on 9/11 will be retroactively erased from the time-space continuum.


Or baptized.
 
2013-03-31 02:32:45 AM

prgrmr: Also, statistically speaking, what's amazing isn't that they pulled cross-shaped steel beams from the WTC rubble; what's amazing is that they only pulled out one.


If memory serves, this is the cross in question. It wasn't just pulled from the rubble; it was standing at the top of a pile of rubble. Make of that what you will, but it is a rather striking image.

thegopnet.com
 
2013-03-31 02:33:05 AM

ThrobblefootSpectre: However on moral issues like alcohol and adult activities, I have to disagree.   Every individual should have equal say in the shaping of public policy.



Should, yes, but when religious groups like AA have permeated so far into the legal system, it's hard for anyone else to have their voice heard without going to federal court, and that's out of reach for most people when nobody else is willing to step in and help.
 
2013-03-31 02:34:39 AM

the ha ha guy: when religious groups like AA have permeated so far into the legal system


I've worked in state hospitals and prisons both, and let me just say this: There is a very good reason AA is so integral in those systems. That reason is because it works.
 
2013-03-31 02:41:19 AM

Sensei Can You See: the ha ha guy: when religious groups like AA have permeated so far into the legal system

I've worked in state hospitals and prisons both, and let me just say this: There is a very good reason AA is so integral in those systems. That reason is because it works.



Federal courts have ruled multiple times that it is a religious organization, therefore mandatory attendance violates the establishment clause.

Was the Constitution reworded when I wasn't looking to say something like "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion unless that religion works"?
 
2013-03-31 02:44:57 AM

Sensei Can You See: prgrmr: Also, statistically speaking, what's amazing isn't that they pulled cross-shaped steel beams from the WTC rubble; what's amazing is that they only pulled out one.

If memory serves, this is the cross in question. It wasn't just pulled from the rubble; it was standing at the top of a pile of rubble. Make of that what you will, but it is a rather striking image.

[thegopnet.com image 850x563]


That is a different cross, compare the two beams and it will become clearly evident.
 
2013-03-31 03:34:48 AM

Amos Quito: FTA: "September 11 "affected all Americans, not just Christians," Silverman continued. "We will not sit and let the 500 atheists who died on 9/11 go unnoticed."


How does Silverman know how many atheists died on 9/11?

Were they registered atheists?


Apparently.

 Of course, instead of finding a symbol in the wreckage that means something to atheists, he would rather ruin the christians symbol.

/Kinda like the kid on the beach who can't build a sand castle and decides to wreck another kids sand castle instead.
//dick.
 
2013-03-31 03:43:36 AM

Sensei Can You See: prgrmr: Also, statistically speaking, what's amazing isn't that they pulled cross-shaped steel beams from the WTC rubble; what's amazing is that they only pulled out one.

If memory serves, this is the cross in question. It wasn't just pulled from the rubble; it was standing at the top of a pile of rubble. Make of that what you will, but it is a rather striking image.

[thegopnet.com image 850x563]


This.

 I don't think anyone thinks the item itself is miraculous, but it did give them something to hold on to when their world was falling apart.

/being christian doesn't mean nothing bad will ever happen to you.
//jesus should be pretty much proof positive of that.
 
2013-03-31 04:24:44 AM

Marine1: REO-Weedwagon: [2.bp.blogspot.com image 344x400]

Let the cross stand as a monument to the question every Jesus-worshiper avoids: Where was your omnipotent, all-powerful, all-loving Jesus when 3,000 people were murdered?

In Heaven, of course. He got there after teaching mankind the sort of lessons we would need to avoid such tragedies. Of course, most don't listen, despite the fact that said teachings are applicable to a good number of life situations, whether you're Christian or not.


Okay, so your Jesus is in heaven. That doesn't alter the question you're avoiding. It's a question that's been asked for thousands of years to people like you, and for thousands of years you have responded with the same weak-sauce bullsh*t answers. It's intellectual cowardice.
 
2013-03-31 04:30:09 AM

REO-Weedwagon: Marine1: REO-Weedwagon: [2.bp.blogspot.com image 344x400]

Let the cross stand as a monument to the question every Jesus-worshiper avoids: Where was your omnipotent, all-powerful, all-loving Jesus when 3,000 people were murdered?

In Heaven, of course. He got there after teaching mankind the sort of lessons we would need to avoid such tragedies. Of course, most don't listen, despite the fact that said teachings are applicable to a good number of life situations, whether you're Christian or not.

Okay, so your Jesus is in heaven. That doesn't alter the question you're avoiding. It's a question that's been asked for thousands of years to people like you, and for thousands of years you have responded with the same weak-sauce bullsh*t answers. It's intellectual cowardice.


You sound mad
 
2013-03-31 04:43:55 AM

cuzsis: but it did give them something to hold on to when their world was falling apart


I sanctify this cross section of metal beams because it can relate to my religion of choice in the form of an iconic symbol. It gives me the strength to carry on in a situation where I'd otherwise collapse in unfathomable confusion and cry out to God about how this could happen. Seeing this here will let me know not to lose my faith in the chaos that surrounds me.

Anyone who needs a direct line with their god or can't take action without the help of the deity and/or puppets holding their hand is too weak for my world. If/when I rule the world said religions and their people will be purged.
 
2013-03-31 04:58:10 AM

Tenatra: cuzsis: but it did give them something to hold on to when their world was falling apart

I sanctify this cross section of metal beams because it can relate to my religion of choice in the form of an iconic symbol. It gives me the strength to carry on in a situation where I'd otherwise collapse in unfathomable confusion and cry out to God about how this could happen. Seeing this here will let me know not to lose my faith in the chaos that surrounds me.

Anyone who needs a direct line with their god or can't take action without the help of the deity and/or puppets holding their hand is too weak for my world. If/when I rule the world said religions and their people will be purged.


Oh looky, someone else volunteered to be god.
 
2013-03-31 05:00:24 AM
^ I plan on funding this idea through jesus fish and assorted trinkets. On the side I will be selling religious pamphlets, some guy gave me one last year and I noticed the price from the publisher... $2.00/each. He and his buddy had a stack of at least a couple hundred that were visible. Write some crap feel good crap and they will eat it up.
 
2013-03-31 07:52:05 AM

lokis_mentor: ecmoRandomNumbers: violentsalvation: I bet the heat and kinetic energy of the collapse left some mangled steel beams strewn about like a spaghetti monster.

The problem with pastafarianism is that it doesn't have its own city. No Mecca, Jerusalem, Vatican, or Salt Lake City. You have to have a city if you want to be a legitimate religion.

Using that criteria Scientology is a legitimate religion.  They (mostly) own downtown Clearwater.


I was just in Clearwater on vacation and went to Clearwater Beach. You have to go through downtown on the way there. It's a pretty average looking downtown until you see the big ass building that is apparently the headquarters building for the "Church".

The precense of the Scientology give the rest of downtown Clearwater a weird vibe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Power_Building
 
2013-03-31 09:21:02 AM
Can I say that atheism is getting a little weird lately?

I don't want religion in schools.  And I understand why some people born in the bible belt or forced to go to Catholic school might be angry.

But atheism is that short of becoming a shrill counter religious movement to the mentally impared cultural conservatives that want the United States to become the Christian version of some middle-eastern countries.

/Becoming just as shrill as the people you are fighting does not help.
 
2013-03-31 09:51:32 AM

Truther: I agree - atheists are assholes.

/a lot of them anyway
//happy Easter you bastards!


And you enjoy your pagan festival of rebirth.
 
2013-03-31 11:37:31 AM
As an atheist, i could care less if this makes it into the museum. As long as it, or people worshipping it, don't take away from the learning in the museum.

To all the christian people saying atheists are assholes because of this small group of idiots, using your own logic:

You are way beyond assholes because westboro baptists are super d-bags and they are christians, so they represent you.

(I don't really think that, but way too JUDGE other people)
 
2013-03-31 12:33:44 PM

REO-Weedwagon: Marine1: REO-Weedwagon: [2.bp.blogspot.com image 344x400]

Let the cross stand as a monument to the question every Jesus-worshiper avoids: Where was your omnipotent, all-powerful, all-loving Jesus when 3,000 people were murdered?

In Heaven, of course. He got there after teaching mankind the sort of lessons we would need to avoid such tragedies. Of course, most don't listen, despite the fact that said teachings are applicable to a good number of life situations, whether you're Christian or not.

Okay, so your Jesus is in heaven. That doesn't alter the question you're avoiding. It's a question that's been asked for thousands of years to people like you, and for thousands of years you have responded with the same weak-sauce bullsh*t answers. It's intellectual cowardice.


Your argument is that God must be a helicopter parent or he can't exist.
 
2013-03-31 12:50:20 PM

REO-Weedwagon: Marine1: REO-Weedwagon: [2.bp.blogspot.com image 344x400]

Let the cross stand as a monument to the question every Jesus-worshiper avoids: Where was your omnipotent, all-powerful, all-loving Jesus when 3,000 people were murdered?

In Heaven, of course. He got there after teaching mankind the sort of lessons we would need to avoid such tragedies. Of course, most don't listen, despite the fact that said teachings are applicable to a good number of life situations, whether you're Christian or not.

Okay, so your Jesus is in heaven. That doesn't alter the question you're avoiding. It's a question that's been asked for thousands of years to people like you, and for thousands of years you have responded with the same weak-sauce bullsh*t answers. It's intellectual cowardice.


How's it a BS answer?

Sure, you could argue that an omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent God would use superhero-like powers to stop some tragedy like that. On the other hand, you could argue that humans have been told by a higher power time and time again not to do things like the 9/11 attacks.
 
2013-03-31 12:51:09 PM

BarkingUnicorn: REO-Weedwagon: Marine1: REO-Weedwagon: [2.bp.blogspot.com image 344x400]

Let the cross stand as a monument to the question every Jesus-worshiper avoids: Where was your omnipotent, all-powerful, all-loving Jesus when 3,000 people were murdered?

In Heaven, of course. He got there after teaching mankind the sort of lessons we would need to avoid such tragedies. Of course, most don't listen, despite the fact that said teachings are applicable to a good number of life situations, whether you're Christian or not.

Okay, so your Jesus is in heaven. That doesn't alter the question you're avoiding. It's a question that's been asked for thousands of years to people like you, and for thousands of years you have responded with the same weak-sauce bullsh*t answers. It's intellectual cowardice.

Your argument is that God must be a helicopter parent or he can't exist.


You said it better than I could. Well done.
 
2013-03-31 12:51:45 PM
For Jesus so loved the victims of 9/11 that He allowed them to perish on that day. So let's put a cross up to commemorate how Jesus sat another one out.
 
2013-03-31 12:54:36 PM

Lando Lincoln: For Jesus so loved the victims of 9/11 that He allowed them to perish on that day. So let's put a cross up to commemorate how Jesus sat another one out.


Again... Jesus is a helicopter parent or He's just another dead Jewish guy?
 
2013-03-31 02:52:36 PM

Lando Lincoln: For Jesus so loved the victims of 9/11 that He allowed them to perish on that day. So let's put a cross up to commemorate how Jesus sat another one out.


There's another guy in here that has been trying to make that argument since yesterday. Youre a bit late to the trolling party.
 
2013-03-31 03:22:35 PM
I'm an athiest, and I think this was a dick move. You're not helping, angry litigious atheist dude.

This is a memorial; where religious symbols tend to be common.

Considering that this was part of the wreckage it is even more appropriate.
 
2013-03-31 09:40:39 PM
More nonsense to keep us from the truth.
 
Displayed 299 of 299 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report