It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Kangaruex4Ewe
I don't think any Christian puts a cross ANYWHERE hoping that it will offend anyone or make anyone uncomfortable. But some would have others believe they do.
originally posted by: Metallicus
originally posted by: Antipathy17
a reply to: Metallicus
SO why can't we use crosses in school again if this is what the federal judge is saying. Hypocrisy.
I don't care if crosses are in schools or not. See, I don't have a problem with religious people and their symbols. Its you and many others that do and I am still trying to figure out WHY. If you are made so uncomfortable by religious symbols you really have more problems than I can help you deal with here.
ETA: Maybe it reminds you that people of faith have something you don't? Or that you might be wrong? Or that you might die unprepared? I don't know why else something so beautiful to someone else could possibly offend someone to the point of needing to destroy it or censor the beliefs.
Are you afraid that religion is going to be catching? Kind of like some people think they might catch the 'gay' from homosexuals? Aren't we supposed to let gay people parade around in public and not be offended? Are you afraid of rainbows and unicorns too?
originally posted by: SaturnFX
originally posted by: beezzer
originally posted by: SaturnFX
originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: SaturnFX
I get your point, I really do. I'm not Christian nor any religion... I just don't see the need to fight over this one. I'd like to see other religious symbols too. Personally I see it as a crossbar. But it's a crossbar that means something to a lot of people.
The reason to fight against it is the same reason beezer wants to fight for it
precedent.
If you can decide to put a giant tax funded cross in the center of new York due to it being emotionally pleasing to some people, then that opens the door to religious symbols everywhere under the same guise.
and there isn't enough space to put a endlessly growing list of religious symbols...what if a pagan died in the towers whom held the ancient greek pantheon to heart in his/her ceremonial practices...should then the entire greek pantheon symbols be there somewhere also? what about the Satanist...the Taoist, etc.
Bullshirt.
I stand against the whole issue for the precedent that it would be deemed "offensive".
I even gave examples.
Now who is being disingenuous?
You are 100% emotion on this issue without any qualification as to the actual issues going on here
tax payer supported religious symbols.
It is offensive, not the cross itself, regardless of the wording, but of any religious symbol being used via tax dollars at work..especially something as important to the national (and international) psyche as ground zero.
originally posted by: ~Lucidity
originally posted by: SaturnFX
I think a religious symbol at the site of a religious atrocity is a bit over the top...I would be for a sort of coexist type plaque with all the religious symbols (and the atom for atheists) though...
But the cross is a Christian symbol, and the attack was by religious fanatics...If religion didn't exist (say it went out of fashion in 2000 globally and everyone just decided to be decent people and humanitarians), we would still have the towers...end of the day, no suicide flyers = no terrorist attacks.
I'm really torn about this one. I really agree with what SaturnFX says here, but I also see how it can be meaningful, as it was naturally formed out of and found in the wreckage and has brought a lot of comfort to many people. That and I really don't mind seeing and respecting the good parts of religion and people, and there was a lot of that too on that particular day. Overall, I think I'd let this one slide and leave it.