Athiests terrified by crosses.

[Vandalshandle]

I wouldn't know where to begin with you or that comedian?

If you insist that I post something serious about a matter that has been settled scores of years ago by the Supreme Court, then I will add this. In addition to the obvious fact that Americans would not tolerate religious symbols erected on public roadways by Islamic or Wiccans, there is the matter of esthetics. I lived in Louisiana which is heavily Catholic, and now, next to an Indian reservation which is 100% Catholic, and pass more than 100 of these crosses in the 2 hour drive to Phoenix. It is as bad as billboards in the otherwise pristine desert. Tacky does not even begin to describe it. They should all be removed and those that try to replace them should be ticketed for littering.

Maybe they should fix the highway instead?

That many crosses is a very rare exception, but I was not even talking about crosses on the highway. And, no, I would not mind Muslims or Wiccans doing their thing as long as it was not injurious to another party. That excuse wears thin, imo.

From my perspective, these zealot atheists are ridiculous, but I do not think it is fair to besmirch atheism because of the acts of the few. I doubt most atheists bother to take the time to care about something like this. So I do not hold them in contempt.

That's fair. I don't take Christians seriously either, which is probably obvious to anyone reading my post about silver electric chairs.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Given the obvious phobia atheists display of crosses, I am surprised they are even able to drive through an intersection.
A sane and sober person wonders, if they eschew god, why they are so fearful and offended when someone else displays this common christian symbol that they make such a terrible and terrified outcry.

This post makes no sense whatsoever.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Why attack something, some symbol you claim has no meaning but, that serves as a comfort to others?

Still not making any sense.

Nothing is being ‘attacked,’ and as already correctly noted, no one is ‘afraid’ of anything.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Why would those things bother me?

Perhaps because they are a violation of your 1st Amendment rights?

The government violates my First Amendment rights in far more aggregious ways every minute of every day. The government also violates my 2d and 4th Amendment rights each and every day. Funny, I don't notice the same culprits screeching, filin suit,or demanding that those violations of our rights be immediately remediated.

At least you’re consistent at not making any sense.

How exactly is the government ‘violating’ your First Amendment rights?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Maybe they are vampires.

Atheists shrink from the sight of a cross the way vampires shrink from, well, the sight of a cross.

I haven't read the entire thread and probably won't because this post really nails it.

Imaginary creatures (vampires) being afraid of the mythical symbol of an imaginary creature (god).

Zombies aren't real either.


`

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Why would those things bother me?

Perhaps because they are a violation of your 1st Amendment rights?

The government violates my First Amendment rights in far more aggregious ways every minute of every day. The government also violates my 2d and 4th Amendment rights each and every day. Funny, I don't notice the same culprits screeching, filin suit,or demanding that those violations of our rights be immediately remediated.

How?

How does the government violate your First Amendment rights?

Before you answer, I suggest you might want to read my sig.

Or, you could just keep making up silly stuff.

 

[Noomi]

Given the obvious phobia atheists display of crosses, I am surprised they are even able to drive through an intersection.
A sane and sober person wonders, if they eschew god, why they are so fearful and offended when someone else displays this common christian symbol that they make such a terrible and terrified outcry.

I am not offended by a cross. What people object to is the display of a cross on public land.

 

[MaryL]

I am an atheist, I love crosses, I won't bother to argue. They remind me of crocuses. They pop up every spring, they remind me of the Jesus myth. They are both so beautiful in their own way. Birth, death, rebirth. Reincarnation, perenials, Symbolism.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I actuall thought of that, tongue-in-cheek. But really, if they honestly do not believe in a god, why are they apparently always demanding that others' symbols be pulled down. What is it about such symbols that enrage them and drive them to react so fearfully.

What am I missing here?

What fear are you referring to?

The 1st Amendment guarantees a secular government free from all religion. Nothing more and nothing less. Religious symbols abound in this society and they are of all faiths. But when it comes to government any religious symbol is a violation of the 1st Amendment.

Standing up for 1st Amendment rights has nothing to do with fear. It has everything to do with upholding the rights of individuals to choose. The government cannot impose a religion without infringing upon those individual rights.

No. The First Amendment guarantees that the Federal Government will not establish or order anybody to participate in religious actitivies, nor will it interfere in any way with religious beliefs or activities of the people. It absolutely was never intended for government or anything else to be free from all religion. Which is why there are numerous religious inscriptions and symbols on federal buildings, the Congress itself once held church services in the capital building, and historical and religious symbols are allowed on our coinage, in the Pledge of Allegiance, and in our National Anthem.

Religion has been a huge factor in our mutual lives together as Americans and is an important part of our national history. To attempt to deny or exclude that from our museums, histories, and/or imagery is not only dishonest, but absurd.

If Atheists are truly Atheists, then they believe in no god and in no religion and a cross would be seen as having no power whatsoever. And they wouldn't care whether it was included as part of our history and/or how it might be meaningful to anybody else.

The rights enshrined in the First Amendment, as is the case with all other rights, although inalienable, are not absolute, and are subject to reasonable restrictions, where the Establishment Clause prohibits the conjoining of church and state, in accordance with the Framers’ original intent that church and state remain separate (McCollum v. Board of Education, School District 71 (1948)).

The First Amendment right is more than just its Free Exercise Clause, prohibiting unwarranted government interference with religious practice, it also disallows the state to seek to codify religious dogma, and compel adherence to that dogma at the behest of the state, employing the power and authority of the state. (West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943)).

Moreover, the First Amendment applies not just to the Federal Government, but to state and local jurisdictions as well (Santa Fe Independent School Dist. v. Doe (2000)). Establishment Clause jurisprudence applies only to government entities, not to private organizations or private individuals. It is absurd, therefore, to make the claim that anyone is seeking to “attempt to deny or exclude [religion] from our museums, histories, and/or imagery.” In fact, those free from faith have no objections to private expressions of religious belief, provided theists refrain from efforts to codify subjective religious dogma into public secular law.

 

[Politico]

Why attack something, some symbol you claim has no meaning but, that serves as a comfort to others?

Still not making any sense.

Nothing is being ‘attacked,’ and as already correctly noted, no one is ‘afraid’ of anything.

And no one is getting the runs because they saw a cross.

 

[MeBelle]

Vampires respect others in ways atheists do not. Vampires at least have some reason to fear Christian symbology because it causes them some harm. Whereas, the"harm" alleged by atheists is a figment of their imagination.

There was some atheist group complaining about the cross at the 9/11 memorial because seeing it gave them 'headaches.'

In which case they should be consulting a doctor instead of trying to take away everybody else's rights. That cross was a piece of debris at ground zero and was a symbol of encouragement and hope to many. To nonbelievers, it was a piece of debris and nothing more. But it is part of the history involved with 9/11 and deserves a place in the museum. To forbid it would be as absurd as not allowing anything Jewish to be exhibited in the Holocaust Museum.

And if anybody is so disturbed that they can't hear or see anything religious without getting a headache, they've got way more problems than any cross could ever be.

Yes, this cross:

Atheists sue to block 'WTC cross' from 9/11 memorial

 

[Spiderman]

There was some atheist group complaining about the cross at the 9/11 memorial because seeing it gave them 'headaches.'

In which case they should be consulting a doctor instead of trying to take away everybody else's rights. That cross was a piece of debris at ground zero and was a symbol of encouragement and hope to many. To nonbelievers, it was a piece of debris and nothing more. But it is part of the history involved with 9/11 and deserves a place in the museum. To forbid it would be as absurd as not allowing anything Jewish to be exhibited in the Holocaust Museum.

And if anybody is so disturbed that they can't hear or see anything religious without getting a headache, they've got way more problems than any cross could ever be.

Yes, this cross:

Atheists sue to block 'WTC cross' from 9/11 memorial

To me this argument is especially silly and I have atheistic leanings

That is not a cross but rather a piece of debris. The WTC was actually made of steel girders intersecting at 90 degrees as are most steel and concrete buildings.

I wonder if these atheists have seizures walking into buildings made of these steel "crosses"

 

[Clement]

That's fair. I don't take Christians seriously either...

Yeah, that's why you're here.

 

[PostmodernProph]

Does the Christian Persecution Complex have an expiration date? (Jon Stewart)

the atheist's one hasn't........

 

[Derideo_Te]

Does the Christian Persecution Complex have an expiration date? (Jon Stewart)

the atheist's one hasn't........

It has only been the rise of the Tea Party that has knocked Atheists from the #1 position as the most hated group in America so I guess that is something positive that the TP has managed to do.

10 Myths Many Religious People Hold About Atheists, Debunked | Alternet

 

[pacer]

Does the Christian Persecution Complex have an expiration date? (Jon Stewart)

the atheist's one hasn't........

Lame. lol

 

[WinterBorn]

Want to really annoy an atheist? Ask them for THEIR proof for their BELIEF. Not believing in gods requires just as much proof as believing in them. And since you can't prove a negative...

I have a friend who collect stamps. It is a hobby for him.

I don't collect stamps. Is my NOT collecting stamps a hobby too?

 

[editec]

Vampires respect others in ways atheists do not. Vampires at least have some reason to fear Christian symbology because it causes them some harm. Whereas, the"harm" alleged by atheists is a figment of their imagination.

There was some atheist group complaining about the cross at the 9/11 memorial because seeing it gave them 'headaches.'

It seems like just about every day another story crops up about atheists attacking another place where they found a cross. The one that set me off this morning was where a woman had put up a cross at the location where her son was killed in an auto accident. I don't know about where you live, but such "memorials" are frequently erected at such roadside locations. This group of atheists had their tender feelings mortally wounded because some woman wanted to honor her dead son and her cross was on a public right-of-way. C'mon, really?
While they may argue that their 1st Amendment rights under the establishment clause, the phrasing is quite open to debate due to differences in interpretation.
The 1st "Prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances." You could just as easily argue the second portion saying the the "free exercise of religion" is being impeded by their demands that any religious symbol they find offensive be expunged from public view.
I will continue to ask, if atheists recognize no god(s), why are they so offended by some symbol that should have no meaning for them to the point of trampling on someone else's Constitutional rights, if needs be to satisfy their vitriolic hatred of such displays?

There are such memorials all over the roads, Gal.

I have never ever heard of anyone complaining about them. Never -- not once! (And I live in one of the "UNChurched counties in the USA!)

Look, amigo, hate atheists to your hearts content. That is your right.

But making silly crap up like atheists have a phobia about crosses just make we believers (that would be you AND me, kid) look like bloody idiots.

When atheists demand that religious symbols come down from public venues, their motive has nothing to do with fear of crosses, and everything to do with fear of theocracies.

And I JOIN them in fearing theocratic governments. I LIKE MY religion and will not tolerate government deciding which religion it approves of.

I do this BECAUSE I am a believer, lad, and I want to keep the freaking government out of my religion.

 

[Foxfyre]

Does the Christian Persecution Complex have an expiration date? (Jon Stewart)

the atheist's one hasn't........

It has only been the rise of the Tea Party that has knocked Atheists from the #1 position as the most hated group in America so I guess that is something positive that the TP has managed to do.

10 Myths Many Religious People Hold About Atheists, Debunked | Alternet

You know I love you DT, but that is absolutely absurd. Nobody hates Atheists just because they're Atheist. There is push back when Atheists mock or ridicule or falsely accuse or spew hatred toward people of faith and they descend en masse to do just that on most religious themed threads. People will resent it when an Atheist so disrespects the faith of others that a crucifix immersed in urine is depicted as art.

And yes, it is highly resented and can trigger very negative feelings when Atheists get their shorts in a wad over something as innocuous as a piece of 9/11 debris that looks like a cross and is seen as such by people of faith or a symbol of the contribtion of religion to the history of an area. Or when Atheists presume that religion has no part of American history and demand that it not be acknowledged.

On the other hand the Tea Party promotes fiscal responsibility, the self-governance that America was founded to be, and pushes back against out-of-control government that continues to steam roller over our liberties, choices, options, and opportunities and consume more and more of our resources. That isn't something to hate. That is something everybody, conservative and liberal, Atheist, Christian, Muslim, and Jew, should embrace.

 

[PostmodernProph]

Want to really annoy an atheist? Ask them for THEIR proof for their BELIEF. Not believing in gods requires just as much proof as believing in them. And since you can't prove a negative...

I have a friend who collect stamps. It is a hobby for him.

I don't collect stamps. Is my NOT collecting stamps a hobby too?

perhaps if you claimed there were no stamps and filed lawsuits to block people from sending mail, it might rise to the level of a hobby.....