New York Atheists Angry Over 'Heaven' Street Sign Honoring Sept. 11 Victims

I think everyone here looks crazy. "President of American Atheists?" Sorry, never heard of ya. I am an atheist and I recall no elections nor a need for a leader or a group. That sounds pretty stupid too. Naming the street that way, that is kind of stupid. Getting mad, that is kind of stupid. All the Christians in this thread condemning that stupidity are really kind of stupid. At least once a month something "American" is being protested by some group of Christians because their imaginary friend does not like it. So you all need to quit. All y'all.

reply to post by TheOrangeBrood


Great! Now if the sign was paid for by private money and not goverment funds, would you still object?

(we're almost there! just take my hand and maybe we can cross this great divide together! )

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by Ancient Champion

The victims of 911 are honored by the naming of a street "Seven in Heaven Way" and the NY atheist get mad try to have the sign removed. If you don't like the sign then don't look at it!

edit on 21-6-2011 by Ancient Champion because: added more words

Yeah. Those crappy atheists, fighting to preserve America's important rights. They should just shut the heck up because YOU like the sign. That's all that matters, right?

When you say, "important rights" do you mean the right to challenge the honorable memory of the fallen firefighters. You, sir, and the complaining atheist are out of line. The people who work there are obviously christian based, which there is nothing wrong with, and they have rights too. I bet if the atheist's house was on fire he/she would have no problem with a christian coming to put it out or rescue a family member. Important rights my arse........

Originally posted by djzombie
How about...

"Norad Stood Down Blvd"

or

"Controlled Demolition Ave"

or

"False Flag Rd"

You would deem none of those acceptable, so why is it acceptable to push a religious group's(any - not targeting just christians) agenda?

edit on 22-6-2011 by djzombie because: (no reason given)

This is why I see this whole thing as trivial.
I would say that it is not only a noun and a religious term. But like Valhalah and Elysium are also part of ancient
history so is Heaven. Thereby by rendering the reason for this protest to speculative and assuming at best

OH well we will all be dead in seventy-five or so years, who cares,
wonder what our children's children will argue about, hope it is something worth their time and effort,

Originally posted by Turkenstein

When you say, "important rights" do you mean the right to challenge the honorable memory of the fallen firefighters.

No.

You, sir, and the complaining atheist are out of line.

Sorry you feel that way.

The people who work there are obviously christian based, which there is nothing wrong with, and they have rights too.

Their rights are being protected by objecting to this sign.

I bet if the atheist's house was on fire he/she would have no problem with a christian coming to put it out or rescue a family member. Important rights my arse........

Right. The problem here is not an attack on christianity. The problem here is that special consideration is being given to certain religious beliefs and it's being funded in part by people who don't share them. I'm sure you don't want to pay tax money to fund Islamic sentiments. Atheists have that right also.

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Except in this case the government imposed a religious sentiment, funded by those who don't share it.

As opposed to the government imposing YOUR atheist religious sentiment, funded by those who don't share it?

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
That's your argument? Well, it's not a religion and I don't care whether anyone else becomes an atheist or not. I do, however, care a lot about our individual rights. It's a shame that you misinterpret the defense of liberty with religious zeal.

Really? You don't care? Then why are you hell (can I use that word?) bent on forcing your NON-religious beliefs on everyone else? Besides, what does "recruitment" have to do with whether something is considered a religion? Last time I checked, Jews don't recruit. Individual rights? Like the freedom to practice one's own religion, without atheists forcing their beliefs on you? That kind of "defense of liberty"? Does that mean that Christians and Jews can complain about a street named Mohammad? How about pagan names? Are those off limits? You'd better get to protesting ZEUS COURT there in New York next. Can't have those Greek God's having street named after them. That would be a violation of the push for the atheist religion. There is also Athena Court, and I can only imagine countless others.

Be honest, it's not about "religion" for you. It's about Christians, and your hatred for them, for whatever reason. It's okay to be honest here.

reply to post by Annee

Atheists must speak up in such situations. Just as the religious must speak up to protect their rights.

Do you think that you can decide what God means to 6.7 billions of us? Funny, Atheists claim to be all difrent yet you have conceptualized God for other people.
Or maybe you just do that because you are not spiritually educated.
Are you going to start removing words from the dictionary? Are you going to hijack all spiritual progress and human language? It's crazy! When will you be satisfied? When there is nothing left?
You may try, but I don't think you can.

reply to post by Kitilani

I think everyone here looks crazy

Maybe it's the way you look ?

reply to post by Annee


My only exception to the arguments in the other thread were that all of the founders were deists when history says otherwise. I don't believe that Christianity is the basis of the US Constitution. There are thousands of years of philosophy from many faiths and concepts included into the Constitution and especially the Bill of Rights.

On this argument I disagree with the idea that the term 'heaven' is 1-entirely religious, and 2-in violation of the Constitution as read in the 1st Amendment.

My arguments are academic, not personal or religious in nature.

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by TheOrangeBrood

 

Great! Now if the sign was paid for by private money and not goverment funds, would you still object?

(we're almost there! just take my hand and maybe we can cross this great divide together!

)

Did you perhaps miss the part where I said "private property"?

I wasnt aware of a Athiest vs Religious conflict going on here at ATS.
I dont speak for anyone but me,but heres my views as a "athiest".

I have decided through my life that i dont believe theres a god.
Thats all.

I dont try to convience others to believe what i do and i dont look down on anyone of any faith.
If believing in a god,makes a person warm and fuzzy at night,and gets them through this lifetime,more power to them.
I respect other peoples beliefs,and i dont want any religious views brought to me.
Cause I dont care what someone else believes.

I just wanna be left alone and not told about god n such.

Oh and one more thing,a street sign? Really?
So then you people have gotten over "in God We Trust" on our money.

Originally posted by Kitilani
I think everyone here looks crazy. "President of American Atheists?" Sorry, never heard of ya. I am an atheist and I recall no elections nor a need for a leader or a group. That sounds pretty stupid too. Naming the street that way, that is kind of stupid. Getting mad, that is kind of stupid. All the Christians in this thread condemning that stupidity are really kind of stupid. At least once a month something "American" is being protested by some group of Christians because their imaginary friend does not like it. So you all need to quit. All y'all.

birds of a feather, it sounds like you know stupid intimately, to be making statements that you have no proof of................

Originally posted by navy_vet_stg3
As opposed to the government imposing YOUR atheist religious sentiment, funded by those who don't share it?

Nobody is pushing for atheist sentiments or beliefs on street signs.

Really? You don't care? Then why are you hell (can I use that word?) bent on forcing your NON-religious beliefs on everyone else? Besides, what does "recruitment" have to do with whether something is considered a religion? Last time I checked, Jews don't recruit. Individual rights? Like the freedom to practice one's own religion, without atheists forcing their beliefs on you? That kind of "defense of liberty"? Does that mean that Christians and Jews can complain about a street named Mohammad? How about pagan names? Are those off limits? You'd better get to protesting ZEUS COURT there in New York next. Can't have those Greek God's having street named after them. That would be a violation of the push for the atheist religion. There is also Athena Court, and I can only imagine countless others.

Be honest, it's not about "religion" for you. It's about Christians, and your hatred for them, for whatever reason. It's okay to be honest here.

Okay, if you want to be willfully ignorant of the facts and erect straw men to tear down I don't suppose we can have intelligent discourse. All I can hope for is that you can get beyond the narrow viewpoint that this is a battle between theologies and start understanding it as an issue of civil rights - and the atheists protect the rights of everyone by taking their stance. Until you get on that page with everyone else I really don't have the interest in addressing your straw men.

reply to post by TheOrangeBrood

I must have. Apologies.

(ADHD)

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by Turkenstein

When you say, "important rights" do you mean the right to challenge the honorable memory of the fallen firefighters.

No.

You, sir, and the complaining atheist are out of line.

Sorry you feel that way.

The people who work there are obviously christian based, which there is nothing wrong with, and they have rights too.

Their rights are being protected by objecting to this sign.

I bet if the atheist's house was on fire he/she would have no problem with a christian coming to put it out or rescue a family member. Important rights my arse........

Right. The problem here is not an attack on christianity. The problem here is that special consideration is being given to certain religious beliefs and it's being funded in part by people who don't share them. I'm sure you don't want to pay tax money to fund Islamic sentiments. Atheists have that right also.

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by Annee

On this argument I disagree with the idea that the term 'heaven' is 1-entirely religious, and 2-in violation of the Constitution as read in the 1st Amendment.

My arguments are academic, not personal or religious in nature.

heav·en
   /ˈhɛvən/ Show Spelled[hev-uhn] Show IPA
–noun
1.
the abode of god, the angels, and the spirits of the righteous after death; the place or state of existence of the blessed after the mortal life.
2.
( initial capital letter ) Often, Heavens. the celestial powers; God.
3.
a metonym for God (used in expressions of emphasis, surprise, etc.): For heaven's sake!

Originally posted by jude11
Religion has nothing to do with this. If Christians want to honor the victims in their way...fine.

If Atheists want to honor in their way...fine.

I don't think the victims will care and the families certainly won't object to fellow citizens honoring their relatives in their own ways.

At least they are not being forgotten...that would be the real crime.

Fighting over who can honor the victims, and in which way is truly dis-honoring them.

edit on 21-6-2011 by jude11 because: (no reason given)

Yeah, unless the victims weren't Christian or didn't end up in heaven. No, I didn't say that.

reply to post by traditionaldrummer


The purpose of the sign is to honor those that died.. I figure even Atheists could respect that.. They are making a big deal over something being used to honor the dead.. Yeah real mature...

Atheists have no respect for the beliefs of others nor honoring the dead it seems..

Originally posted by TheOrangeBrood

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by Annee

On this argument I disagree with the idea that the term 'heaven' is 1-entirely religious, and 2-in violation of the Constitution as read in the 1st Amendment.

My arguments are academic, not personal or religious in nature.

heav·en
   /ˈhɛvən/ Show Spelled[hev-uhn] Show IPA
–noun
1.
the abode of god, the angels, and the spirits of the righteous after death; the place or state of existence of the blessed after the mortal life.
2.
( initial capital letter ) Often, Heavens. the celestial powers; God.
3.
a metonym for God (used in expressions of emphasis, surprise, etc.): For heaven's sake!

And clearly the dictionary is the ultimate authority on the different potential meanings for heaven. There is a nightclub in New York called Heaven. So if a street named solely Heaven was right there, clearly it would be a reference to Heaven itself and not the night club b/c the dictionary says so.