On that bright September 11th morning almost 10 years ago, Muslim terrorists took down the World Trade Center, and amid all the heartbreak, dust, and rubble two intersecting steel beams stood impossibly in the shape of a cross giving comfort to a confused and bewildered country.
Now, a group of atheists is suing to take down the cross.
On Saturday Father Brian Jordan, a Franciscan Monk who blessed human remains and ministered to Ground Zero workers after 9-11, blessed the cross at the 9/11 Memorial and Museum at the WTC site.
The lawsuit which aims to have the cross removed from the memorial, names pretty much anyone it can name including the state of New Jersey, the city of New York, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and New Jersey Governor Chris Christie.
American Atheists, which filed the lawsuit in state court, argues that keeping the cross at the memorial is “government enshrinement of the cross” and “an impermissible mingling of church and state.”
You see, for wacko atheists, simply chronicling the cross as part of the story, which it clearly was, is too much. They literally want history whitewashed of any Christianity (never mind the present and future.)
Dave Silverman, president of the atheist group, says the cross must come down because it’s “become a Christian icon.”
Establishing his mental midgetry for posterity, Silverman argued that it’s “ridiculous” to think that God can exist because people were killed on 9/11. Ah, what scathing logic.
“It has been blessed by so-called holy men and presented as a reminder that their god, who couldn’t be bothered to stop the Muslim terrorists or prevent 3,000 people from being killed in his name, cared only enough to bestow upon us some rubble that resembles a cross. It’s a truly ridiculous assertion.
Here’s the thing -millions of men and women took solace from that cross and if you’re going to memorialize that day in reality, you have to take into account and remember that cross as part of the story. It was a real part of that day that shouldn’t be whitewashed because some happen to not believe in God. 
Silverman himself admits that the cross played such an important role in the aftermath that it became a “Christian icon.” For him, that means it must be hidden away even by those who simply seek to remember all the events surrounding 9/11.
Would Silverman have the memorial whitewash the reality that many Christians took comfort in that cross?
The horror of that day is part of the story. The sacrifice and the bravery is part of the story. And yes, the cross is part of the story of that terrible day. And it shouldn’t be ignored because some take or feign offense.
Would Silverman also have us ignore the radical Islamic madness that prompted the attacks because it too touches on religion?
Think about this. If Silverman’s logic is followed we should also make sure that any Star of David or any Jewish symbols are removed from the Holocaust Museum, which receives millions in federal funding.
That, of course, would be ludicrous just as this lawsuit is ludicrous.
HT CNN
Note: I originally mistakenly wrote 11 years ago. I fixed it.
Comments
Post a Comment
Wow.
I understand how the problem of evil is a stumbling block for atheists, but they should understand that this cross is more than a Christian icon: this is the only remaining part of the WTC, and as you said, became a symbol of hope for a nation in which faith is dwindling.
I hope this lawsuit is ignored and thrown into the Hudson.
It wasn’t almost 11 years ago. People like you getting their facts wrong. It was nearly 10 years ago. 2001 to 2011 equals 10 years. And, well, guess what? Religion as we know it is dead. There is no reason you should force that cross onto those victims’ families who do not believe in the Christian God. Also, it stands as a beacon to expand the ideals of the religious wars. STOP PUSHING YOUR ARCHAIC BELIEFS UPON OTHERS! Christians are just as bad throughout history of being terrorists to those who didn’t follow their faith. The Zeitgeist movement is the answer. To stop all of these nonsensical beliefs and instead begin to grow as human beings. That is what your God wants. Stop misinterpreting the messages, move forward out of this abyss of different religions fighting, move into the new age of human understanding. A new age of using our newfound knowledge to understand better our environment and the idea of God. Do this, or you are surely doomed.
It was not the only part of the WTC that was remaining - it was a part of a much larger pile of rubble - it just happens to be that christians have projected their beliefs on to this particular piece. It is amazing that there never seems to be a star of david in the aftermath of disasters - must be that god can only do simple shapes.
And I agree that this “cross” did become a symbol for millions of christians, which is not the same as americans - it certainly wasn’t something that I took solace in. So keep the cross, put it on a nearby church and quit thinking that because you see greater meaning in a piece of junk, everyone else must too. I guess it is true what they say, one man’s junk is another man’s treasure.
Wonder what the reaction would be if Muslims wanted to put up a Star and Crescent. Would Matt be so quick to jump to its defense? And there are many of us who WERE involved in efforts at the WTC after 9/11 who DON’T take solace from the Cross. There’s no reason why the beliefs of those who do trump those who don’t. It’s why we HAVE a 1st amendment.
State is separated from Church, not from citizens who are Christians, Muslim, Budhist or of any other religion or atheists or agnostics.
If citizen has right to place at public place, buseum, government building, open space or others, any simbol he or she has right to place also religious simbol.
Regarding religious pictures or simbols in public buildings, schools, gov.buildings, police stations, military barracks is same.
If a person has right to place and keep at his or her working ploace any picture or simbol, sportsman, sport club, city, wife or husband, actor, own children etc, she or he has right to place and keep a religious picture or simbol.
To claim that any expression of ( religious ) identity or preference can bother or insult people of other identity or preference is the same as say and claim that placing poicture of one sport club can insult fans of other sport club.
would an athiest sue a person for being mentally Ill? That is in fact what they are doing as they think religion is mental illness. My defense would be, “The devil made me do it”.
Worst reasoning ever. Atheists think that people (normal people) are insisting that everyone be subject to the authority of their privately held beliefs. Again, I doubt Jews affected by 9/11 found solace in the rubble.
I wonder whether or not those who claim, like Zeitgeist ISNOT Nazism above, that Christians should stop forcing their religion on others fall victim to the very thing they criticize. It is impossible for there to be equality among ideologies. One ideology must always suppress another. Differing worldviews cannot coexist in peace. The one offends the other. Take for example the Zeitgeist movement. It follows in the path of the Socialist movement centuries ago - to create a perfect society. It idealizes one aspect of society and magnifies that aspect beyond its capacity. Like the utopian movements before, it will either never come to fruition or else, like Socialism, be corrupted into something that achieves its goals while abandoning its principles.
A utopia is impossible. One ideology will always seek to dominate over another - such is the nature of an ideology when placed in the human brain. The ideology preferred corresponds to the individual’s own ideology. We humans have fragile egos, easily offended. We humans also tend to place our egos above everything else - if something damages our egos, we seek to defend them.
People also tend to see things - to look for things to put hope in. It may be an ideal or a pile of rubble. Even though I am a revert to Christianity and a convert to Catholicism, I do not see a cross. I see a signpost, if anything.
I have not met anyone moderately proficient in the intellect department who was converted to any ideology because of the internet. So, I end.
Another point: FREEDOMK OF EXPRESSION.
If freedom of expression of religious belief is existing, a person has freedomk to express it also by exposing religious simbols and pictures.
Where ? Wherever a person is present.
I hope many atheists are recognizing right of expression. I am convinced that people who are suing in that matter are small unimportant minority between atheists.
I do not like to call terrorists who destroyed WTC “Muslim”. They are just terrorists, they do not represent Islam, or great part of Muslims. Same as Norvegian killer can not be called Christian terrorist. He is just terrorist.
Zeitgeist,
There is no reason you should force that cross onto those victims’ families who do not believe in the Christian God.
Let me get this straight…you blast Matthew for getting the “10/11 years” wrong and then go on to make the above statement?????
Where exactly does it say that the families of the victims are non believers who are offended by the cross? Talk about making things up!
It’s why we HAVE a 1st amendment.
Bob,
Ummmm…actually, no, it’s not. That amendment was put there to protect US from the government interfering, not to protect the government from us. As for a Muslim symbol…IF those beams had fallen into the shape of a star and crescent, then THAT is what would have been salvaged.
Religion as we know it is dead.
Religion is dead? You guys are funny. Actually, since you don’t “know” anything at all about religion, then you are correct. Religion as YOU know it is not only dead, it never existed.
You remind me of vampires. The cross has he power to send you into paranoid delusions.
Freedom of expression is a private right - we do not have the right to place private objects on public lands. If you want to build 1,000 crosses built out of I-beams on your front lawn or at your church go for it. But I don’t see anyone lobbying to put a big red atheist “A” on the mall in DC.
DKeane,
But I don’t see anyone lobbying to put a big red atheist “A” on the mall in DC.
Are you saying that Atheism is a religion???
Are you living on the moon?
http://articles.cnn.com/2009-10-21/us/new.york.subway.ads_1_new-yorkers-subway-stations-atheist?_s=PM:US
When two become one, our Creator gives the newly begotten sovereign person His own Name: “I AM” (Nature gives the person a unique DNA) When anybody denies “I AM” as the American Civil Liberties Union and atheists are doing they become LIARS. “I am”, “I will”, and “I do” are the cornerstones of the human species. What covenant, contract, discipline, government does not rely upon the consent, the free will, of the governed, couples, partners, adherents? NONE and those who propose that it does are LIARS and EVIL DOERS, ESTABLISHING THE WORSHIP OF THE DEVIL ON EARTH BY REMOVING THE NAME OF OUR CREATOR, “I AM”, “I WILL”, and “I DO”.
I am not saying that atheism is a religion, but it is a privately held belief that there is not god - so my point still stands. I do not live on the moon, and you do not actually eat the body of christ when you receive communion.
Those of you who wish for religious symbols to be removed from such monumental sites, may want to read more regarding the court ruling Lemon v. Kurtzman (1962)- court’s decision argued that the separation of church and state could never be absolute: “Our prior holdings do not call for total separation between church and state; total separation is not possible in an absolute sense. Some relationship between government and religious organizations is inevitable,” the court wrote. “Judicial caveats against entanglement must recognize that the line of separation, far from being a “wall,” is a blurred, indistinct, and variable barrier depending on all the circumstances of a particular relationship.”
There is now a Lemon Test applied to determine First, the law or policy must have been adopted with a neutral or non-religious purpose. Second, the principle or primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion. Third, the statute or policy must not result in an “excessive entanglement” of government with religion.
Why must taxpayers continue to waste money paying for assumed violations of separation? If it isn’t hurting anyone physically or mentally, stop wasting time and money just to make a stand. You have a right to your beliefs and determine how you wish to view anything in this world, but no one is making you look at a physical piece of metal.
Zeitgeist, you’re certainly welcome to your view of the Constitution. It’s WRONG, but you’re welcome to it. Since the govt may not ESTABLISH a religion (verbatim quote), your view is not supported in law. Sorry.
Mary De VOe…well…your view is EXACTLY why we HAVE a Constitution prohibiting establishment of religion. Your paranoid hatred of non believers caused so many problems in history the Founding Fathers knew religion was too powerful a belief to be let loose in govt.
Jhawkins: at what point do non Christians surrender? Why do you continue to force people to spend money defending religious freedom? The argument cuts both ways.
As Abraham Lincoln said : Several of the several states that voted to ratify the Constitution had official state religions whereas atheists suck.
and you do not actually eat the body of christ when you receive communion.
That all depends on how you define “body”. Do we eat His arms and legs an toenails? No. Do we eat His “body”? Yes. Body means “the whole of the thing.” He is truly present, the bread and wine truly become His “body”.
And I think you mean that you don’t BELIEVE that we eat the Body of Our Lord. But you don’t like the word “believe”, right?
States with official religions back in the day
http://undergod.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=69
Ever notice that nobody has devoted their life to opposing belief in Bigfoot or unicorns or UFOs? These atheist fundamentalists suggest by their shrill fanaticism that they are not quite so confident in their unbelief as they say. Nobody feels threatened by something they are sure is not there.
DKeane,
we do not have the right to place private objects on public lands
First, we didn’t “place” it there. The terrorists did. They took down the building and the “Cross” was a result. We just “left” it there.
Second, would you have been okay with a beam staying there as a memorial if it wasn’t in the shape of a cross? With just some piece left over, put there in remembrance of the tragedy? Because that too would be a private object on public land. Is it just because it is in the shape of a cross, or would any “object” be objected to?
Spartacus: none of those state religions was Catholic. Are Catholics ready to support, with their tax dollars, official Protestant churches? Are they willing to have their children educated in Protestant schools? In some places in the south, Catholicism is viewed as the religion of the Anti Christ. You willing to see THAT view in govt?
Kevin, such an argument is duplicitous. Communism is wrong and evil. The “Commumist man” does not exist, neither does the ‘science’ of communism. Yet it threatened billions. A wrong idea still has consequences.
Wow, you got on the American Atheists hot list for sure! I’ll bet you are on their web site’s blog or something, but I do not care enough about them to look and see.
If a giant crescent had come out of the rubble, or a giant star of David, then as a Christian I would have no problem with it going in the museum. It’s a MUSEUM about what happened. And while I do think other religions are wrong—which should not bother American Atheists—I don’t see the need to call anyone belonging to them an idiot, or trumpet my superiority as a human being simply because I don’t believe what they do. Strangely enough, MY my religion tells me I am NOT a superior human being.
And the advocacy group American Atheists are WAY too preoccupied with demonstrating to themselves how great they are.
Gail, as Golda Meir once said to someone, ‘stop being so humble, you’re not that great’. Projecting your religous views onto atheists as if they think they’re so great is useless. You don’t know what they think. The fact is this is a secular country. Unless you’re willing to unleash the demons of religious fanaticism in this country, the public square should be a place where all religions are treated equally and none given special preference.
Dear Bob. I am four square in favor of a Catholic Confessional State but the purpose of my post was to note that the Several States that did ratify the Constitution did have existing official state religions thereby rendering nugatory all of the nonsensical 1st Amendment related claims advanced by atheists
Well, wrong again Spartacus. The fact they HAD state religions is exactly that: a statement of what WAS. The fact is the SCOTUS has, over time, especially with the 14th amendment’s requirement of incorporation, deemed state religions unconstitutional. So no, it’s not nugatory at all unless you think the last 100 years or so of SCOTUS rulings are also useless.
Bob: You’re hilarious! “The demons of religious fanaticism”—ha ha ha ha ha!
MK - I would be fine if it was just a beam. But the reason for moving the cross back is because it is a cross and specifically represents christian beliefs.As per my previous point, if to beams created an A and atheists wanted to give it special meaning by placing it at the 9/11 memorial,do you think that would be appropriate (I certainly don’t).
I I did not mean the work “believe” - there is not an ounce of evidence to support your claim about the body of christ being a wafer.
This is embarrassing to even have to explain to people. Plain and simple it is disrespectful to put this up as a symbol “as comfort for all” (as written on the cross). Either take the cross down, or put up all religious symbols. Why is this so hard for people to grasp?
Also it is not some miracle that the cross exists. Are you aware of how buildings are built? It would be a miracle for a cross NOT to come out of the rubble. This is not some anomaly and even if it were it still does not justify displaying the cross as a symbol of “what happened”. THIS ATTACK WAS ON AMERICA! NOT CHRISTIANITY!
I am so very, very tired of a select group’s attempts at eradicating all symbols that point to God, and particularly Christian symbols. But, they are not happy with eliminating Christian symbols, they want to eliminate Christianity entirely because it does not fit in with their twisted world view of tolerance. Christianity speaks to moral decision making and living as God wants, which they despise. We have only ourselves to blame as Christians because many of us have been “asleep at the switch” while this small minority works diligently to destroy all references to God and in particular the “Christian God”. As the United States becomes more and more secular, those of us who believe in God and put our faith in Jesus Christ, must be His warriors fighting against this infringement of our religious liberties. I’m up for the fight!
MaryM, sorry you’re offended by Americans standing on their constitutional rights. Your paranoia beliefs that people want to eliminate your religion is belied by the fact you wish to force yours on others. Seems if anyone is ‘eliminationist’ it’s certainly YOU! Perhaps the beam in your own eye is obscuring your vision. Yes, atheists are a minority. But there is NO requirement in the Constitution saying that the Bill of Rights is conditioned on demographics. Warriors? Fight? Perhaps Anders Breivik is the person you should be talking to.
@Mary M…THIS IS EXACTLY WHY I"M AN ATHEIST! “I’m up for the fight!” Exactly! You feel threatened by someone with opposite views and now your inciting a fight. I am not trying to eradicate Christianity as a whole. I’m just advocating for equal representation for everyone. That is what being American is about.
Also, I don’t have a “twisted world view of tolerance”. I’m a good person because I WANT TO BE A GOOD PERSON. I don’t need an ancient book with a magic man in the sky who will send me to Hell if I do wrong. And by the way, please learn your text. There are plenty verses in the Bible, Quran, Book of Mormon, etc. that promote slavery, murder, rape, womanizing, etc.
ThatGuy wrote: “I’m a good person because I WANT TO BE A GOOD PERSON.” See how the demand for objective data is dropped when the subject is the self? ThatGuy need not supply an evidence of his goodness—for himself a subjective assertion is sufficient. Laughing out loud!
DKeane,
IF you accept the premise that God exists, then there is all kinds of evidence that bread can indeed become the “Body of Christ”. If you do not accept the premise that God exists, then there is much less. Some of the Eucharistic Miracles that have taken place could indeed be considered evidence of the empirical kind. How strong that evidence is, is a different question, and one that you have not asked, but there IS evidence.
As for the beam…first you say that it is ANY privately owned piece of property being displayed on public property…now you say certain pieces of privately owned pieces of property being displayed, and you further clarify that it is is specifically the religious aspect of said object. Which is why I questioned your assertion that Atheism is not a religion. You playing both sides of the coin. Either ALL public displays of private property are to be objected too, thus a “plain” beam could not be displayed, or you really are saying that RELIGIOUS displays cannot be publicly displayed, in which case the “A” on Capitol Hill would have to be viewed as a religious symbol. Which is it?
So no, it’s not nugatory at all unless you think the last 100 years or so of SCOTUS rulings are also useless.
Do you really want to visit that? We should really stay on topic, but if you’d like we could find a pro life site and argue the uselessness and dishonesty of the right to abortion…?
They know in their heart there is a God that is why they are intimidted by the Cross. They don’t understand Mercy. They don’t want it looking them in the face because then they see their sadness. The athiests are very sad people, so they want to make joyful Christians sad, to.
MK the issue is not abortion. You have a choice: live in a secular society with freedom for all, or live in a Protestant religious society. Go ahead; make your choice.
@Tabitha Raised: Believe me, I am not intimidated by the idea of a God. I’m not scared by your cross and that isn’t what this argument is about. Atheists are happy people. Free thinking. Science loving. People loving. We have no predispositions about others based on their beliefs, or what an ancient book tells us to think about others. Your argument is simply invalid.
Tabitha, this tendency on the part of many religious people to idealize their own beliefs, and the differing views of others is one of the strangest tendencies you folks have. Any reason you think atheists are sad or should be denied religious freedom? The Founding Fathers didn’t. Were they ‘sad’ too? You ready to pay your good tax dollars to the Protestant Church to live in a society that has a state religion? Is that what you’re advocating? But, again, go ahead; defend your view that atheists are ‘sad’.
Either take the cross down, or put up all religious symbols.
So you’d be okay with something from every religion being displayed? Even if that meant that Atheism could not be represented since it is not a religion? One has to wonder why it is only the Christian Faith that you have a problem with. I was at the Art Institute last month and the entire stairway is lit up with running neon quotes from the Dali Llama. This, no one has a problem with. I wonder what the reaction would be if it was lit up with running quotes of Jesus. Weird that you don’t see the hypocrisy of your words. “Religion needs to stay out of the public place” really means “Christianity needs to stay of the public place”. Why can’t you just admit that? You have no problem with ANY other religion. At least be honest!
As Christopher West says: If you want to know what is truly Sacred look to what is most violently profaned.
People, people, people. Atheists do not hate religious believers! We just would like equality and don’t appreciate religion being forced upon everyone. Stop skewing Atheism into this cult of believer-hating baby-eaters.
MK the issue is not abortion.
The ISSUE I was addressing with that comment was the assertion that the SCOTUS has never made a useless decision. I showed that they have.
No no no - it does not work that way. You first don’t accept that something exists and then find evidence to fit your previously held assumption (and discard the facts that don’t) - so you are off to a wrong start right off the bat. Eucharist miracles never seem to occur to hindus - I wonder why?
No I am not playing both sides - neither the cross or the beam would be considered private property - they would be pieces in a display on public land. The issue is who has the right to have their personally held beliefs reflected in displays on public lands - and the answer is no one. This would include atheists. The kicker here is that you want to equate “personally held beliefs” with “religion” and the two are not the same. A simple wiki look up of “religion” shows in the first paragraph that they are not equal to each other. There is no dogma, certainly no sacred texts, and atheists do suspend reason in favor of faith.
@mk: I have an issue with the Christian faith because I live in America and it is thrown at me every. single. day. Also, I would be okay with something from every religion being displayed as well as something for Atheists if they want to take that route. I just want equality. Did only Christians die in the attacks of 9/11?
Seems there is quite a few atheists reading the National Catholic Register and that is good. Maybe they will have an enlightenment and become believers. God works in mysterious ways.
MK I agree they have made useless AND WRONG decisions. But religious freedom isn’t one of them, in fact it’s the law of the land. You may OPPOSE it and wish to impose a Saudi Arabian style religious govt., but you’re obfuscating the issue. The FACT is you CAN’T impose religion in this country. Sorry. That’s the law.
ThatGuy wrote “Stop skewing Atheism into this cult of believer-hating baby-eaters.“ A paraphrase of Emerson is sufficient response: What you do speaks so loudly I cannot hear what you say to the contrary.
This is America last time I checked. Don’t try and acknowledge Christians and disregard everybody else.
“So no, it’s not nugatory at all unless you think the last 100 years or so of SCOTUS rulings are also useless”
Dear Bob. I do not think the SCOTUS’ 1st Amendments rulings concerning the 1st amendment are useless. I think they are tyrannical, execrable, and completely contrary to the obvious meaning of the text of the 1st Amendment.
That the several states which ratified the US Constitution had an official state religion means that those states properly understood that the first Amendment refers solely to the Federal Gov’t, not state govt , counties, cities, or municipalities.
ThatGuy wrote “I don’t need an ancient book with a magic man in the sky who will send me to Hell if I do wrong.”
Glad to see you don’t judge others because a book tells you too, ThatGuy! Instead you judge them because of what you baselessly believe “an ancient book” tells THEM to do. That’s much better.
As amusing as all this has been, I will not be reading these comments any more. Have at it!
@Gail Finke: Are you saying that I’m wrong for being annoyed with people who don’t think for themselves and instead use a book to think for them?
DKeane,
Eucharist miracles never seem to occur to hindus - I wonder why?
Ummmmm…because the hindus don’t have the Eucharist?
So private displays on public property are okay as long as they don’t reflect the viewpoints of anyones philosophy or religion? Then why is it okay to have a statue of “Justice” in public? Isn’t that a Greek God? How about all of the Religious artifacts in the National Museum? There is a Stained Glass Exhibition at Navy Pier. And what about Religious Paintings in Art Museums. Should we cut down all the Fir Trees in the world because some people view them as Religious symbols? Water is used in baptism. Are oceans and lakes okay?
What you are proposing is impossible as everything represents something.
Spartacus, when you’re appointed to the SCOTUS, let me know. You offer NO justification for your views other than some arbitrary love of theocracy. Your logic is the reason we HAVE a 1st amendment! The Founding Fathers knew the dangers of religion. You’re living proof of their wisdom. You completely ignore the 14th amendment and its incorporation clause. In addition ALL state religions were Protestant. Let me know if you’re ready to pay for your local Protestant church, OK? Catholics were FORBIDDEN to hold office in Maryland until 1826. Is THAT the state religion you want?
Were there a National Atheist Headquarters (NAH) located in, say, Portland, Maine and I was the Mayor of Portland, Maine, I would petition the City Council to erect a GIGANTIC Crucifix, not just a Cross, on City Property just as close as physically possible to NAH.
And if the ACLU sued the City of Portland, I’d erect a GIANT Crucifix as close as possible to that headquarters of Satan’s Servants.
It is about time that American men stood-up to these neo-pagans and tell them, “Go to Hell,” when they sue and demand a State of City remove a religious symbol they do not like. Do not remove one religious symbol that they demand we remove. What are the local Cops gonna do, arrest the mayor for upholding the US Constitution?
This is all so silly and it’d stop in ten seconds if America still had men.
This seems like it might be a legal mess. While the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey own a significant portion of the land on which the World Trade Center once resided, the ownership of a few acres of the land is questionable.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/22/nyregion/22blocks.html
If the cross is on private property portion, then there are no Establishment Clause violations (I would think).
The atheist group seems to be relying on the Non-Endorsement principle of the Establishment Clause (there was no link to the complaint). This may or may not be a legitimate argument depending on what else is on the World Trade Center site. If there are Stars of David and other religious symbols on the site, then there would be no Endorsement issue, according to “County of Allegheny v. American Civil Liberties Union” (allowing a Christmas tree on a government forum when there was a menorah nearby).
Of course, there may be other issues such as whether the World Trade Center site is a “public forum”.
All in all, this just seems like an atheist being a pain (shocker!)
ThatGuy,
I have an issue with the Christian faith because I live in America and it is thrown at me every. single. day.
And I have a problem with homosexual marriage, abortion, contraception, Victorias Secret and Abercrombie and Fitch, atheism, humanism, secularism and accusations of racism being thrown in my face ever. single. day. It is BECAUSE I live in America that this can happen. Tolerating these things insures my right to express the things that I do uphold. EVERYONE is represented. What you really mean is that you wish Christianity would disappear. No one likes to be convicted of immorality on a daily basis. Just as Christians don’t like to be confronted with immorality on a daily basis. But acceptance of one is insurance of the other. It’s called Freedom.
@I am not Spartacus: You’re relating Atheist headquarters to the headquarters for Satan’s Servants?!?! Your argument ends right there. How much hatred do you have in your heart, wow. Totally unrelated and uncalled for. As an Atheist, I don’t believe in Satan just as much as I don’t believe in God. People do bad because they are bad. People do good because they are good. I believe in people, no supernatural beings.
This is precious! ThatGuy writes “Are you saying that I’m wrong for being annoyed with people who don’t think for themselves and instead use a book to think for them?” That, of course, implies ThatGuy discovered the Pythagorean Theorem all on his own – no stinkin’ thinkin’ from a book!
Bob,
The FACT is you CAN’T impose religion in this country. Sorry. That’s the law.
Then I am confused. If it “CAN’T” be done, why are you complaining that is IS being done?
IF SCOTUS is capable of making bad decisions, and we are in agreement that they are, then why do you use those decisions to back up your view? SCOTUS can be wrong, has been wrong, therefore because SCOTUS says it is so, it is right. How does that make sense?
Bob. You appear to be a man who thinks that the several states which ratified the Constitution while having official state religions really did not understand that the true meaning of the first amendment really meant that they were ratifying a Constitution that condemned them.
I ‘spose that is what passes for logic in atheist circles but, back in sanityville, we recognise just how crazy an idea that is
ThatGuy,
People do bad because they are bad. People do good because they are good. I believe in people, no supernatural beings.
Interesting theory. For clarification, could you define “good” and “bad”?
@mk: You misunderstand me. I mean the argument is normally against Christianity because of geography and where you’re raised. Also, you claim to know what freedom is? Well how is it freedom when a cross is put up on a tragedy that many non Christians were killed in? Where is the representation of all people? You can’t just claim a tragedy with your cross because you’re the majority.
@Bob - I have no desire to “force” my views on anyone; by the same token I don’t want anyone infringing on my rights as a Christian which is exactly what is happening in this scenario. Paranoid? Not hardly, Bob. “Perhaps Anders Breivik is the person you should be talking to.” In addition to being a very, very angry person, you are a also a very, very disturbed person, Bob, and I have absolutely no qualms about saying that.
@ThatGuy - I’m not threatened by anyone. By virtue of my Baptism I am called to be a defender of the Faith and that is exactly what I am. The New Testament is not a proponent of any of the things that you mention. I’m a follower of Christ and not the book of Mormon or the Quran. By the way I do not think that you are a bad person; I would have no way of actually knowing that. Only a cross was left as a remnant of the terror attacks on Sept. 11 so I have no idea why you feel that “all” need representation.
@mk: You need clarification? This is an issue I have with religious people too. They think that I don’t know morality because I don’t use your book. I’ll answer anyway.
Let’s see. Things like rape, murder, robbery, cheating, etc. are considered bad. Hate, bad. Fighting, bad. War, bad.
As for good. Just anything that improves the life of another person. Charity, good. Stopping a bully, good. Studying medicine, good. BEING KIND AND ACCEPTING OF OTHERS, good. Things like that.
MaryM, let’s see. You want to “fight” for your religion and be a ‘warrior’. THOSE are your angry words. The irony is delicious! He said exactly the same thing. YOU are the one invoking violence in the name of your religion. You have enough beams in your eyes to make your own woodshop! Perhaps you should tone down the violent rhetoric rather than accusing others of what you yourself are guilty of.
@Mary M: Only a cross was left as a remnant? It is a BUILDING! Do you need to research how buildings are constructed? The fact that beams were broken in to a “t” formation is not exactly crazy. And I believe “all” need representation because “all” were affected! Wow you really are selfish to think that only one group should be represented when the attacks affected the whole nation and even the world.
Spartacus, again you just ignore 200 years of history. The SCOTUS agrees with me. The law of the land agrees with me. The 14th amendment…which you ignore…agrees with me. And I notice you keep ignoring the fact ALL state churches were Protestant. You willing to pay your tax dollars in support of Protestantism that does, in some cases, view Catholics as the anti-Christ? Go ahead and dodge the issue. The law agrees with me. History agrees with me. And we know that because you refuse to address these issues.
DearThatGuy. Yes, I truly believe that the ACLU, started by a Commie, is a servant of Satan.
I mean, even Bob Dylan knows that, “You’ve got to serve somebody…”
I really do not care if you deny the existence of God and Satan because your personal beliefs are neither normative nor probative vis a vis reality and I most certainly do not acknowledge that your particular proclivities in any way give you one whit of authority so that you can arbitrarily decide that my argument has ended.
You have zero authority before God and Man and The US Constitution and I laugh at the demands of all atheists.
There are nine atheists in America. Big Deal!!
If you think your arguments and claims are worthy, go out in the streets and gather signatures for a referendum and you will find your own selves laughed at and ridiculed - justly so.
And, so, knowing that, y’all have to repair to the corrupt Judicial system to force your satan-serving-system down the throats of Americans.
Spartacus has a problem: there are as many Jews in America as there are atheists. Yet he wants to deny atheists their religious freedoms because he’s determined you have to have a certain number of people in order to have Constitutional rights. Wonder what he thinks of Jews! No wonder the Founding Fathers gave us the 1st amendment. They saw people like Spartacus and knew they’d destroy this country
@Spartacus: You’re so ignorant. Atheism is the fastest growing minority in America. What are you talking about? And if you knew your American history you would know that the Founding Fathers DESPISED the idea of church and state being one. Do your homework, get educated.
Dear Bob. History may agree with you but history does not agree with the clear meaning of The First Amendment of the US Constitution.
If you can show me the words in the US Constitution that declares that the SCOTUS is the sole Branch of Govt which decides what the Constitution means then I will buy you an order of fries at Duckfat in Portland, Maine.
Our Federal Govt is comprised of three separate, equal branches of govt. Separate. Equal.
IOW, were we to have a POTUS who was not a nitwit, like Dubya was, The POTUS could declare, say, a SCOTUS ruling “unconstitutional” and the Legislative Branch could declare an action by the POTUS “Unconstitutional.”
You get the idea.
“But, but, but, then who would decide what the Constitution means?”
We the people would, via exercising the Franchise.
Imagine an election in which we would not be discussing how nice Barry Sotero’s Mother was or how bad Berry Sotero’s Pastor was but we would be discussing the meaning of the Constitution and voting for or against a Candidate based upon what his political philosophy was and how he understood the Constitution.
NAH !!!! Cant have that. Who’n'hell are the people to decide what The Constitution means. I mean, who really thinks the people have one word to say about it?
The idea that politics means that free men get together to decide how their lives ought be order is so, oh, I dunno, like something you’d find on the floor of a way-back machine.
Better stick with the nine unelected nuts serving for life on The SCOTUS. So what if some of them have been in diapers and totally psychotic while they were sitting on the bench?
America was established so that nine unelected men could tell us whether or not we can have a Crucifix in a Town Hall or how many gallons of water usage our toilets may be restricted to.
Dear Bob. Religion means “bond with God.” Because you claim you do not believe in God you can not possibly have a religion.
Actually, you can because with atheism all things are possible
Spartacus, keep asserting it all you want. The 14th amendment, which ‘incorporates’ the Constitution’s guarantees into the states, proves you’re wrong. No state can infringe freedom of speech, of the press, or of religion. You’re plainly wrong. In my hometown of Pittsburgh, the police used to arrest people for swearing at cops until courts decided this was an infringement of speech. You keep telling me what you WANT the constitution to mean; sorry, you’re not on the Court. The FACT is, the 14th amendment prohibits STATES from infringing ANY of the Bill of Rights freedoms, including speech, press or RELIGION. You can DREAM all you want about what you WANT it to mean but until you get rid of the 14th amendment, you’re simply wrong. And I notice you’re STILL ignoring the fact that Catholics would pay for Protestant churches under YOUR view of govt. YOUR view would DESTROY the Catholic church in the US!
Spartacus, you’re right, I don’t have a religion. But my constitutional rights are not contingent on my religion. And with any religion all things are possible. There are 35,000 Christian denominations. You guys are all over the place on everything, so don’t lecture me on failures that are too obvious in your own beliefs.
BOB LOL Writing that there are nine atheists in America has nothing to do with any notion of their having to exist x number of atheists, or any other cohort of like-minded men, before they have Constitutional rights. It has to do with the reality that there are few atheists in America.
Yes, yes; I know. Atheists are growing by leaps (of logic) and bounds and, for all I know, banana twirls and hop-scotch skips.
I know that atheists don;t believe in God, I did not know that they did not believe in humor
Spartacus, there are as many atheists are there are Jews. You seem to think rights are contingent on numbers. You’re, again, wrong. You be sure and let me know if Jews are to be denied their rights because they’re not a big proportion of the population
@Sparticus: It’s not humor, it’s disrespect. America is about 15% Agnostic, Atheist, or unaffiliated. That’s greater than all other religions combined except those branched off of Christianity.
Dear Bob. Good Lord (no personal insult intended) I would expect an expert atheist to know that the 14th Amendment to the Constitution was never legally ratified so your repetitious reference to it is as convincing to me as a member of the Politiburo explaining to some peasants in Ukraine that, “Of course there is religious freedom, it is in Soviet Constitution” as he arrests them for participating in a procession on the Feast of Corpus Christ, would be an explanation convincing to those peasants.
@ThatGuy - “And I believe “all” need representation because “all” were affected! Wow you really are selfish to think that only one group should be represented when the attacks affected the whole nation and even the world.” Just what sort of representation do you propose ThatGuy? I don’t see any evidence of any symbolism left behind of any other belief system.
I’m selfish? How could you possibly make that assessment when you don’t even know we. You’re so determined to have your “beliefs” represented that you forget about mine and those of us who are Christian. For heavens sake the beams are a remnant from the WTC. What is your problem? No one is telling you to worship it. This is total nonsense that all should be represented. All of what????
Dear Thatguy. Impossible. Our current POTUS, imo the greatest Kenyan-Born POTUS the United States has ever had, has said that we are a Muslim country.
BTW,, disrespect is the basis of some great humor (see Rodney Dangerfield)
Spartacus, again and again, you seem to think you’re wearing 9 black robes. Sorry, I’m not taking your word for it. You go ahead and call Justice Roberts. When he gets back to me and says you’re right, then I’ll concede the issue. Until then you’re just another TeaPartier with a fringe, quirky view of reality. And, I notice again you refuse to address the issue of how a State Protestant Religion would deal with the Catholic Church. The answer: not too well. You’re your own worst enemy.
@Mary M: what do I propose? I propose AN AMERICAN FLAG! Doesn’t that represent OUR country?! Why go to a religious symbol as representation when that represents a faith, not a country. And stop claiming “evidence of symbolism”. Like I said, it is a building. If you knew how buildings were built you would know that steel bars are laid down in a grid format. This means thousands of “t”‘s are made. Regardless, this is not a reason to put it on display as representation for “all”.
“America is about 15% Agnostic, Atheist, or unaffiliated.”
Dear Bob, Back in the day, the combined circulation of The New York Times and “The Grit” was enormous but, uncouple the combined circulation and you knew that Nine people read The Grit (maybe they were all atheists, who knows?)
DKeane,
“Freedom of expression is a private right - we do not have the right to place private objects on public lands.”
Nobody placed a private object on a public land. It remains as part of the rubble from 9/11.
Spartacus has, I think, pushed himself over the limit WRT the President. This disgusting, racist tainted view of Obama is typical of the fringe, right wing racism so prevalent in society. And, no, he never said anything about the US being a Muslim country. Lying is not a good way to make your case! This is hardly humor, given John McCain’s response to the women who, during the campaign, made this very charge.
@Amanda: It became a private object when they said “Hey look this is a cross and represents Christianity and also everything we should stand for. Lets put it up in the memorial as a symbol for all.” It would be a completely different thing if Christians kept it to themselves and said “This is a symbol for OUR faith”. There is no need to put it in the memorial when not everyone who died was Christian.
Dkeane,
“I did not mean the work “believe” - there is not an ounce of evidence to support your claim about the body of christ being a wafer.”
There are books of Eucharistic Miracles. If you have time, read up. Secular scientists have been involved in the testing in some circumstances. God Bless!
Dear Bob. I can’t say much for your reading comprehension. Just because I take the sensible position that the SCOTUS has violated the Constitution does not mean I think I am a member of that lamentable and execrable group of unelected tyrants.
You atheists seem to hate liberty and so you worship at the feet of The SCOTUS because they do your bidding. I get it.
I just think it strange that you think others are constrained to adopt your idolatry. The fact is that my Faith can be freely accepted or rejected whereas your tyranny is forced down my throat by Judicial tyranny.
Well, this has been fun atheists.
As always, you revealed yourselves as the haters of liberty and petty tyrants that you are.
Good bye
Well how is it freedom when a cross is put up on a tragedy that many non Christians were killed in? Where is the representation of all people? You can’t just claim a tragedy with your cross because you’re the majority.
But that’s just it. We’re aren’t claiming the “tragedy”. Two beams fell in the shape of a cross. Victims, whether of the attack itself or the fallout from it, derived comfort from the perceived “sign” that we are being watched over, that their loved ones had not died in vain and that Love is victorious. If a group had chosen to put up any other sign representing hope, forgiveness, healing and love…say, a Peace sign or a heart or even a symbol from their religion, I think most of us would have understood that healing comes in many ways. But no one has advocated putting another symbol there. Instead, you are advocating removing one that came “naturally”. The bottom line is that you are ignoring the fact that most people in this country DO believe in God, and are comfortable with the sign of Christianity because it represents the things I listed. If we put up a Swastika, I could understand your angst. The majority of Americans are of one the Abrahamic Faiths. The majority of the victims were also. I would be willing to bet that even Jews (I’ve heard Michael Medved say as much) are also comforted by the Cross, not because of it’s religious meaning, but because of what it represents. Healing. Love. Forgiveness. Just as the statue of Justice represents, well…Justice. One does not have to believe in the Greek Gods to believe in the “concept” of Justice, anymore than they have to believe in Jesus, to believe in Forgiveness and Love. Turning this pain and grief into a political ploy is truly sad. In essence you are taking away a thing of comfort for a lot of people who are in a great deal of pain.
Fight the religious symbol war on more neutral grounds and you’ll be served much better. This is not the place to stage a battle. Let the victims and their families have this symbol of peace. It harms no one, and helps a great many. I, we, don’t see it as some great Christian Victory. Neither should you.
@Spartacus: Yeah, we’re the tyrants. I mean just look at all the wars and violence we start because people have different views than us!
Spartacus, you’re right, I don’t have a religion. But my constitutional rights are not contingent on my religion. And with any religion all things are possible. There are 35,000 Christian denominations. You guys are all over the place on everything, so don’t lecture me on failures that are too obvious in your own beliefs.
Psssst…Bob. This is a Catholic blog. One Faith, One Church. Not 35,000. You’re confusing us with Protestants. Just thought I’d let you know so that you don’t continue to sound uninformed…carry on.
Yeah, we’re the tyrants. I mean just look at all the wars and violence we start because people have different views than us!
Or how many people have been oppressed by humanist/atheist governments. Cuz that’s never happened. (Russia, China, Poland, Ukraine, Germany, Italy, Stalin, Marx, Lenin, Hitler, Mao, Castro…all upstanding guys representing upstanding governments…not)
When two become one, our Creator gives the newly begotten sovereign person His own Name: “I AM” (Nature gives the person a unique DNA) When anybody denies “I AM” as the American Civil Liberties Union is doing, he becomes a LIAR. “I am”, “I will”, and “I do” are the cornerstones of the human species. What covenant, contract, discipline, government does not rely upon the consent, the free will, of the governed, couples, partners, adherents? NONE, and those who propose that it does are LIARS and EVIL DOERS, DEVILS IN HUMAN FORM ESTABLISHING THE WORSHIP OF THE DEVIL ON EARTH BY REMOVING THE NAME OF OUR CREATOR, “I AM”, “I WILL”, and “I DO”.
Separation of church and state is a concept not inscribed in our Constitution, nor, in our Declaration of Independence. The doctrine of Separation of Church and State is left to each individual to determine for himself. Some souls embrace their original innocence and virginity and become consecrated virgins, ordained and anointed to God alone, to spend their lives in the worship of God and prayer for their brethren. Some souls enter the married state to serve God by bringing forth our constitutional posterity, newly begotten sovereign persons with immortal souls. Some souls remain in the single state to serve God in any way God calls. Separation of church and state is an absolutely personal choice made through the free will endowed by our Creator and the consent of the individual. This freedom to separate church and state on a personal level brings forth civilization.
The American Civil Liberties Union is challenging the Cross at the World Trade Center. The ACLU did not put the cross there, and they may not take it down. The shadow side is, and their claim is, that they are being forced into belief in God,(They do not have free will?) into the response to God’s Gift of Faith. The ACLU has rejected God’s Gift of Faith and now imposes its rejection of God’s Gift of Faith on every other person. Imposing religion or non religion on another person is unconstitutional as the separation of church and state is a very personal intimate choice made by man and his conscience. For the ACLU to impose its conscience’ choice is totalitarianism and tyranny of the worst kind. The ultimate end of separation of church and state is the separation of body and soul. Death is an intimate relationship with our Creator for each and every human being, every citizen, and every neighbor.
When the atheist files suit in a court of law, the atheist uses God’s name, “I AM” in vain and commits perjury. “I AM” filing suit, “I AM” testifying,” I AM” an atheist, “I AM” the American Civil Liberties Union.
“I AM” an atheist is the most ridiculous statement in the universe, in history and in the annals of time. “I AM” an atheist is a lie and perjury in a court of law. “I AM” an atheist and “I“ refuse to accept the founding principles inscribed in the Declaration of Independence that acknowledge God, “our Creator” WHO endows all men, created equal, with unalienable rights of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness, then “I” repudiate my citizenship and legal standing in a court of law, because “I” have denied another person their citizenship and legal standing in a court of law.
@mk, Hitler was a self proclaimed Christian. He has been called an Atheist throughout history because Christians don’t want to claim him as their own. We see the same thing with the Norway assassin. Fox News for instance refuses to mention him being Christian.
There is a bit of a double standard going on.
Atheists and non-Christians want the “right” not to be offended by the cross. Do any of them speak up about the “right” of a Catholic innkeeper to not host a lesbian wedding, or the “right” of a Catholic drugstore owner to not sell contraceptives, or the “right” of a Catholic doctor or nurse to refuse to perform an abortion, or the “right” of Catholic parents to not have their son or daughter live in a co-ed dorm?
These may seem like red herrings, but why is it that only atheists, homosexuals, pro-choicers, etc. need their precious sensibilities stroked? We “religious” folk have to just grin and bear it as our religious freedoms and freedoms of expression are methodically stripped away.
@misshiss: Maybe because we’re minorities who are commonly neglected and disrespected? Your rights aren’t being stripped. However, they are being preferred over the rights of others, which leads to inequality. As I stated above, I think they should either put up an American flag, or take down the cross, or put up a representation for all religions and Atheists as well. No need for just one representation.
I love when atheists say “Religion is Dead” on a Catholic website. Makes me laugh.
@ThatGuy: Do you deny any of the scenarios I listed? For they have all occurred. And I would think you wouldn’t care whether or not religious imbeciles like us acknowledged or respected you.
I’m an atheist, but this lawsuit is retarded. REAL atheists don’t give a flying fudge what others do with their belief structure.
@ThatGuy - You are spewing false propaganda regarding the Christian connection of Hitler as well as the Norwegian terrorist. These individuals just happened to be at one time, or are currently “Christian”. They did not do the things they did in the name of Christianity. No “authentic” Christian would ever do such a thing. Just because you don’t get any comfort from knowing there is a God who cares and loves us shouldn’t mean that the vast majority of Americans who do and also happen to be Christian shouldn’t have a comforting reminder. The minority voice shouldn’t silence the majority voice. By the way, Christmas is also a Federal holiday. Further proof that the vast majority of people in the United States are Christian and celebrate Christmas. Apparently the Federal government has no problem with making Christmas a Federal holiday. I believe in God and His miracles. That beam remained as a sign that Christ knows our pain and in the end He conquers evil….whether you believe that or not is irrelevant. The Truth is not subjective.
Why is it ok for athiests to be labeled “Wacko” in this article’s title?
Your christian hypocrisy is once again showing.
Your god is like your weiner. It’s great that you love it, it’s great that you worship what it can do, but keep it to yourself and don’t whip it out in public. And NEVER try to force it down my child’s throat. And yes, putting up a cross on PUBLIC lands or with PUBLIC funds is forcing it on my children.
Misshiss mixes apples and fish. We’re talking about the 1st amendment here. The GOVT does NOT have a right to establish a religion. PERIOD. Sorry you guys don’t like it. That’s really tough beans. As to innkeepers, etc., commercial transactions are NOT covered by the 1st amendment. You don’t have the right to keep blacks out of a restaurant because of ‘freedom of assembly’, etc. And doctors and nurses DO have the right to refuse to participate in abortions so THAT line is off base. There is no right for the govt to establish a religion. Learn the difference!
@Matthew Archbold: I love when atheists say “Religion is Dead” on a Catholic website. Makes me laugh.
When atheists say “Religion is Dead” they really mean “When you are dead you will no longer be able to worship almighty God”. God is the God of Life. God bless
MaryM you’re wrong. The minority voice DOES have the RIGHT to silence the majority voice, based on the rights of EVERYONE. That’s what the LAW says. This is NOT a democracy! Minorities have rights. The govt does not have the right to tell the people how to believe.
It’s not only about the people that died on that sad day; it’s also about the people that responded. The Responders are the ones who testify to the Cross. They are the ones who responded to the horror but did not let the evil of the day change their hearts. Their testimony is a large part of 9/11 story and THAT is why the Cross has to be included.
Religion: definition #3 (a) any specific system of BELIEF, worship, conduct, etc. often involving a Code of ethics and a philosophy….(b) loosely, any system of beliefs, practices, ethical values, etc. resembling, suggestive of, or likened to such a system; as, humanism is his religion.
#5 any object of conscientious regard and pursuit; as, cleanliness was a religion to him.
Source: Webster’s New Twentieth Century Dictionary ISBN 0-671-41819-X
I think an argument can be made that Atheism is a religion because it is based on nothing other than one’s ‘belief’ that there is no God. If so that would mean that Atheists are using the courts to Force their Religion on Everyone else. It’s kind of like the pot calling the Kettle black.
Muslims, Jews and Buddhists are not ‘offended’ by the cross, just like we are not offended by the Star of David or other religious symbols. Are you offended by the tooth fairy? To be offended by something you have to have some idea of the power behind the symbol. You’re being offended by the Cross is the strongest testimony to the Power of the Cross. By being offended by the cross, you are acknowledging the power of the Cross.
@DKeane “I do not live on the moon,” ” Well It’s good to know you have not totally lost touch with reality but that does not excuse the remainder of YOUR HATEFUL statement “and you do not actually eat the body of Christ when you receive communion.” I believed in faith until I came to KNOW, that the Eucharist is the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of our Lord, Jesus the Christ. Just because YOU do not know something does not make it untrue.
Here is the complaint filed by the group:
http://www.atheists.org/upload/WTC_Complaint.pdf
I like how in paragraph 19 of their complaint they allege that the 9/11 attacks were part of a “faith-based initiative”, as though it was faith itself and not radical Islam that caused that tragedy.
What a bunch of jerks.
MaryDevoe again, you’re wrong. The separation of church and state, as described by Jefferson, is enshrined in the 1st amendment where it says the govt does not have the right to establish a religion. Why are so many religious people IGNORANT of the 1st? Is this willful? A matter of pride? In addition, Mary, you don’t know history. If the govt DID establish a religion it would DESTROY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. America is NOT Catholic and never HAS been. YOU are a MINORITY. So either you are in favor of the destruction of the Catholic church OR you are in favor of a secular govt. Those are your choices!
@DKeane “You first don’t accept that something exists and then find evidence to fit your previously held assumption (and discard the facts that don’t) - … Eucharist miracles never seem to occur to hindus - I wonder why?” Is it not atheists who throw out facts that they can’t explain. Miracles, by definition are things that ‘happen’ but science cannot explain. People, believers and non-believers, in a 30 mile radius saw and experienced the SAME event. So even people who were not at the event and had no interest in the event, saw the same thing as the ones there. What was the event? The sun danced in the sky at Fatima. What was the scientific answer? Mass Hallucination!
@DKeane “personally held beliefs reflected in displays on public lands - and the answer is no one” Then nothing could be displayed. Shoot, I guess we can’t even have buildings, after all, those square boxes or just someone’s opinion of what a thing should be.
@DKeane “millions of christians, which is not the same as americans” So now you’re saying Christians are not Americans
@DKeane “ subject to the authority of their privately held beliefs” are not you trying to subject us to your private belief?
@DKeane “I am not saying that atheism is a religion, but it is a privately held belief that there is not god “ Atheism is a religion, and yes it is ‘your’ private belief, where is your scientific Proof that the Christian God does not exist?
@Zeitgeist ISNOT Nazism “STOP PUSHING YOUR ARCHAIC BELIEFS UPON OTHERS!” … “To stop all of these nonsensical beliefs and instead begin to grow as human beings. That is what your God wants.” Now you’re confusing me… first it’s a nonsensical belief, then it’s what God wants. So you claim to have knowledge of God and His desires for us, but then it’s all just nonsense?? Don’t they call that Bi-polar disorder? ARCHAIC BELIEFS? So just because it’s something that mankind has known for thousands of years… It’s no longer true? So how long does our knowledge of gravity have to be around before we can stop believing in it? I really need to know this before I waste my time and energy trying to loss a couple of pounds. Oh, the philosophical questions… If there is no weight, will I still have to buy bigger pants?
JohnY is it no more a matter of faith to say there’s no god than it is to say there’s no Easter Bunny. It’s up to the affirmative side to make its case. It’s up to those who say there IS a god to prove it; it’s not up atheists to disprove it.
@Bob “MaryM, let’s see. You want to “fight” for your religion and be a ‘warrior’. THOSE are your angry words. The irony is delicious! He said exactly the same thing. YOU are the one invoking violence in the name of your religion.” YOU OWE MaryM an APOLOGY. There is NOTHING violent in her remarks. We fight with our presence and our witness and the Truth. The only Violence is in YOUR reply and YOUR assumptions.
@Bob “The fact is this is a secular country.” No It’s not, but some are trying to make it that way.
@ThatGuy “don’t appreciate religion being forced upon everyone” Who’s using force here? If you go there and do not like the Cross… Then Don’t Stop and Look, Just Keep Walking!
@ThatGuy “War, bad.” Soooo, When the whole world and pretty much all major religions made war on Hitler’s Germany and Japan… That was a bad thing?
JohnY I was there as a responder. YOU DO NOT SPEAK FOR ME! What ARROGANCE you people have! You speak for Jews! You speak for Muslims! You speak for First Responders! NONSENSE. Yes, I was there. Yes I am offended by the GOVERNMENT sponsoring religion.
I like how in paragraph 19 of their complaint they allege that the 9/11 attacks were part of a “faith-based initiative”, as though it was faith itself and not radical Islam that caused that tragedy.
What a bunch of jerks.
Very christian name-calling of you. As one of the “jerks”, I see no difference between what the radical islamists did for THEIR religion than you are attempting to do for yours. They did so because they had FAITH their god (who if I am not mistaken is the same as yours - just God 3.0) would reward them for their actions.
JohnY can you read? I quoted her verbatim. “War”, “Fight”...uh those are VIOLENT words. Sorry sport. Go ahead and spin it. And yes, America is a secular country. We have equal rights for all, regardless of religion. You don’t like it? Saudi Arabia is just a plane flight away. They have a religious govt. I’m sure you’d like!
Hmmm… A Christian by defintion is a follower of Christ. What evidence in the lives of Hitler or the Norway assassin give evidence that they are Christians? Just saying you are something does not make it so. I could say I am a physician but without that Medical Degree, I am delusional as was Hitler, as is the Norway murderer. Of course the liberal press and all those who have disdain for Christians will milk this for all it is worth.
I think people should be more fearful of atheism getting an upper hand than Christians or Jews. I will remind you that it was the “atheistic Jacobin regime” of the French Revolution that imprisoned and executed those who would not renounce their faith and take their anti religious oath of “equality”. And it was atheists of Spain and Mexico during the early part of the last century who executed a significant number of Catholic priests, religious and lay people simply for being Catholic. Certainly more people have died in world history in the name of atheism than all “religious wars” especially when you consider Mao, Stalin, etc.
These constant lawsuits by atheists against anything that shows American freely expressing their faith is more than just an annoyance for believers. They even constantly sue the Boy Scouts of America because they won’t take God out of their oath!!! It is a very frightening trend based on observing past world history. Pray that God will give us strength and discernment to fight this scourge and pray that God confounds those who are so hell bent on stamping out Christianity which they cannot do but they CAN cause utmost suffering in the meantime.
@bob Mia Copa, I should have said “many of the responders”. But back at you, why should we disregard the other responders just because of your view. The ‘entire remainder of the place’ represents your view. Why can we not have just a small place in the remembrance also?
Mary, you’re engaging in the ‘no true Scotsman’ fallacy. What evidence is there they were Christian? Well…they called themselves Christians, just like Bin Laden called himself Muslim. Catholics have executed people for not being Catholic so I wouldn’t push your line of reasoning too far. It’s funny to watch you get offended when people defend their rights under the Constitution. You’re a minority, too, Mary. We’re fighting for YOUR rights. First they came for the atheists…next are the Catholics. You think Protestants are going to ignore the Catholic church when they establish a state religion? That has NEVER happened in history. NEVER
That picture of the monk blessing a piece of twisted steel is pretty funny. Someone needs to remind him that he’s in Manhattan, not some medieval village where they still think Earth is the center of the universe.
We should disregard the OTHER responders because THAT’S THE LAW. That’s the Constitution. That’s my RIGHT. And I stand on and defend my rights! That’s why I was THERE.
“Psssst…Bob. This is a Catholic blog. One Faith, One Church. Not 35,000. You’re confusing us with Protestants. Just thought I’d let you know so that you don’t continue to sound uninformed…carry on.”
That’s just another flavor of Christianity. The point stands. Also, you have the Anglican church and all the different varieties. Just because you call yourself the one church, it doesn’t mean you’re right. All the other ones probably think they are just as legitimate.
@bob “ “War”, “Fight”...uh those are VIOLENT words” No, they are just words… It’s the weapons some choose to fight with, that could make them violent. The weapons Mary uses are not violent. You chose to interpret them as violent.
Tell you what, John. When the govt establishes a religion, you be sure and tell the govt that when they outlaw Catholicism in favor of Protestantism, OK? I’m sure they’ll appreciate the info!
JohnY it’s funny watching you deny the fact ‘war’ and ‘fight’ are violent words. No doubt folks thought that about Anders Breivik right up until the other day. I guess ‘jihad’ isn’t violent either. It’s just your view it is.
@YourStupidityIsShowing: “Very christian name-calling of you. As one of the “jerks”, I see no difference between what the radical islamists did for THEIR religion than you are attempting to do for yours.
You don’t see the difference between flying planes into buildings with thousands of people in it and writing comments on a blog?
“As one of the jerks…”
Are you one of the plaintiffs or one of the lawyers who wrote that statement?
@bob “We should disregard the OTHER responders because THAT’S THE LAW. That’s the Constitution. That’s my RIGHT. And I stand on and defend my rights! That’s why I was THERE.” Your RIGHT? To disregard everyone else! My, my, my, you sure do scream when others just want to express their RIGHTS. I too Stand and Defend MY RIGHTS.
John Crysler wrote: “Someone needs to remind [Father Brian Jordan] that he’s in Manhattan, not some medieval village where they still think Earth is the center of the universe.” I’m sure he’s very aware that people in Manhattan think their groins are the center of the universe. Thanks for your concern.
JohnY you bet. When someone wants to abuse the constitution, I, as a PATRIOT, will scream. You’re lukewarm about the Bill of Rights? Well, to paraphrase Wilde, if that’s the way you treat your rights, you don’t deserve to have any! You don’t HAVE a right to establish a religion. It does NOT exist. I can’t say it any more plainly than that.
@Bob - I didn’t know the Protestants were even thinking about establishing a state religion. I’m not offended when someone defends something they believe in. I’m confident in what I believe so I defend that. By the way, my words of “fight” or “war” are meant as in spiritual warfare - not hand to hand combat. I’m sure you know that but just thought I would mention it. Anyone who is a serious Christian understands that Satan is very alive and active in the world and understands we are at war and fighting him all the time. Clearly I am not in hand to hand combat with Satab and his minions - it is a spiritual warfare.
@John Crysler - “That picture of the monk blessing a piece of twisted steel is pretty funny. Someone needs to remind him that he’s in Manhattan, not some medieval village where they still think Earth is the center of the universe.” Say what? Catholic clergy bless objects and people all the time whether it’s in Manhattan or the Amazon. By the way, monks live away from the secular word. This man is wearing a Franciscan habit and is a priest in the order of St. Francis and was probably a member of a local church “run” by the Franciscans. I’m thinking maybe the church where the Chaplain for the Firefighters perished on 9/11.
“Spartacus has, I think, pushed himself over the limit WRT the President. This disgusting, racist tainted view of Obama is typical of the fringe, right wing racism so prevalent in society.”
Dear Bob. I have heard Barry Sotero’s relatives state that he was born in Kenya.
Why is it that you think a child born in Kenya is necessarily racist, I have no idea.
“And, no, he never said anything about the US being a Muslim country.”
Bob, Bob, Bob,, tsk tsk. tsk; denying the ipsissima verba of our maximum leader. That is truly racist you know.
Here is a source acceptable to atheists, Hell’s Rag, The New York Times:
June 2, 2009, 7:39 PM
Obama Says U.S. Could Be Seen as a Muslim Country, Too (Notice the racist, hateful, extreme right-wing, Nazi, goober-gulping, headline?)
By JEFF ZELENY
HAHN, Germany — As President Obama prepared to leave Washington to fly to the Middle East, he conducted several television and radio interviews at the White House to frame the goals for a five-day trip, including the highly-anticipated speech Thursday at Cairo University in Egypt.
In an interview with Laura Haim on Canal Plus, a French television station, Mr. Obama noted that the United States also could be considered as “one of the largest Muslim countries in the world.”
seems to me an atheist wouldnt even consider 9/11 a reality - not a govt reality anyway… because nothing is real that has to do with any religion
@BOB “ I guess ‘jihad’ isn’t violent either. It’s just your view it is.” No it’s not just ‘your view’, it’s when you pick up a gun, knife, bomb that makes in violent. In today’s society the terms ‘war’ and ‘fight’ are commonly used, in congress and other places, when expressing disagreements. They do not always denote violence. I was merely pointing out that you were reading ‘violence’ into a statement where it did not exist. Again, I am merely defend OUR RIGHT to free speech. We should not be called ‘Violent’ for exercising our Right.
MaryM you’re truly funny! They’re not talking about establishing a religion, as your co-religionists pointed out, THEY ALREADY DID! Many states HD a state religion BEFORE the SCOTUS struck them down. If you don’t know this, you don’t belong here because you’re too uneducated to participate in the discussion. Yes, many states HAD a state religion. NONE of them…NOT ONE…was Catholic. You wanna gamble? Want to take a chance you could be forced to pay taxes for S. Baptists to educate your kids in their religion? You seem to be under the delusion that a state religion would be Christianity. That has NEVER happened in history. There have been PROTESTANT state religions and Catholic foreign state religions but NO ‘Christian’ religions. If we ever get the state religion YOU WANT, it’ll be the end of your church!
@Tim: You don’t see the difference between flying planes into buildings with thousands of people in it and writing comments on a blog?
There’s a huge difference between flying planes into buildings and blog posting. One requires skill and training - the other not so much. Where did I state they were the same? You claimed that flying those planes wasn’t a faith-based initiative. I was supporting the other position - that it was. Can you describe how THEIR faith is different from yours so I can be enlightened? I see no difference.
Jerk = A member of the organization supporting the lawsuit. If you were only implying that the actual litigants and attorneys are the jerks, then I misunderstood. I was under the impression you were casting your epithet toward all atheists who support the view that 9/11 was a faith-based initiative.
“Someone needs to remind him that he’s in Manhattan, not some medieval village where they still think Earth is the center of the universe.”
Dear Mr Crysler. Geo-Centrism is true. The Earth is the center of the Universe. Do you know that is a possibility conceded by that Traditional Catholic, Albert Einstein?
Poor you, you muckle-onto atheism at a time when the Copernican revolution is being scientifically exposed as a fraud and you think that such preening over a false ideology is a sign of scientific triumphalism that makes you appear smarter than us poor deluded souls.
I can’t say much for your timing, Mr Crysler
Sleepyhead’s bizarre use of language is typical of religious fanatics. Daniel Diner, a prominent historian at Hebrew university, has pointed out that religious fundamentalism distorts language. Sleepyhead is a good example of that!
Spartacus continues his racist tirade against the POTUS. The POTUS notes the US has Muslims. To Spartacus that means the ‘Kenyan born’ president is a Muslim. The fringe right continues to spew hatred
@bob “You don’t HAVE a right to establish a religion.” Having a piece of steel in the shape of a cross… that establishes a Religion? (LOL) Haa, ha, ha, ha, ha. Sorry, I’m laughing so hard I had to stop wipe my eyes. Now that this blog has crossed into the really bizarre… I have to get back to work… a piece of steel establishes a religion… I’ll have to use that joke at tonight’s meeting… Maybe if I bring a my old lawn mower blade I can get a tax exemption… oh wait, would the dull blade be ‘violent’.
@Bob - “If you don’t know this, you don’t belong here because you’re too uneducated to participate in the discussion.” I don’t belong here, Bob? Really? I didn’t know that you were in charge of who belongs here. Let me tell you something Bob, I’m educated enough to know tht there is a God and His name is Jesus Christ. I’m not impressed with your very flawed “education”.
Johny, yes, putting a cross on public property is an establishment. Sorry you don’t know the law. Perhaps if you read more about it, you’d see that the Constitution isn’t a laughing matter!
MaryM…uh you really should know WHAT you’re talking about before making random assertions about policy. The FACT that many states DID have religions…well you didn’t know that, did you? The fact NONE of this were Catholic…also something you didn’t know. You’re just in here, a big happy puppy, making all kinds of noises about how wonderful religion is, completely detached from any historical context. Yep, my education is flawed. I believe in RELIGIOUS FREEDOM not THEOCRACY
@Bob - I really get under your skin, don’t I? By the way, I like puppies, thanks for the compliment! Bow wow!
@YourStupidityIsShowing: “Very christian name-calling of you. As one of the “jerks”, I see no difference between what the radical islamists did for THEIR religion than you are attempting to do for yours.”
You said you see no difference between what radical Islamists do (killing people) and what I am attempting to do. All I am attempting to do is post comments on the internet. You can see how one can infer that you are equating the two.
I was calling whoever wrote the allegation in paragraph 19 of the complaint a jerk. Blaming faith (and, by extension, every who considers themselves among the faithful)for the 9/11 attacks is extremely low. Especially when its done as a passive aggressive aside in a complaint.
If you are propagating such a lie, then I don’t have much respect for you.
And if you are insinuating that I, as someone of faith, am the same as someone who flies a plane into a building full of people, than I am calling you a jerk.
Well, Mary, yes, stupidity does offend me and you’re a champion. As to a puppy, well, there are male puppies and females…
Dear Bob. Just because I continually prove you wrong is no reason to lie about me - “Spartacus continues his racist tirade against the POTUS. The POTUS notes the US has Muslims. To Spartacus that means the ‘Kenyan born’ president is a Muslim. The fringe right continues to spew hatred.”
Barry Sotero’s relatives say he was born in Kenya is what I have written. I wrote nothing about racism.
Your baseless racism charge is a clear sign you do not know what you are talking about.
I did not write that Barry Soteros is a Muslim. I wrote that he said this was a Muslim country and you said he never said such a thing and so after I proved he did say that, after I proved you were wrong, again, you did not have the common decency to admit your error.
No, like a typical fringe extremist far-left extremist radical , you began to lie and charge me with racism.
Bob. If you can not be more of a man and admit that you were wrong and stop lying about things that I never said, I may become discouraged and choose to stop proving you wrong and that would deprive me of a lot of joy.
Bob, why are you trying to deny me joy?
Spartacus…you prove me wrong? Gee. Perhaps you can prove to us that the POTUS was born in Kenya. You made that claim…care to prove it? And his mother registered his birth in Hawaii. Last time I checked, a mother is a relative so SHE never made the claim he was born in Kenya. Yes, saying he was born in Kenya is a sotto voce racism. And you claimed the POTUS said this was a Muslim country. When you posted the full quote it’s seen he didn’t. So far you’re batting zero.
@bob “Johny, yes, putting a cross on public property is an establishment. Sorry you don’t know the law. Perhaps if you read more about it, you’d see that the Constitution isn’t a laughing matter” You did not say: ‘establishment under constitutional law’. You are correct, the Constitution is no laughing matter. A law requiring every public building to have a Cross representing specify ideals spell out in the law would indeed be unconstitutional under the establishment clause. This is NOT THE CASE here.
-now I’m late for work… I see that stupidity offends you… it’s the total lack of Common Sense drives me nuts.
@ Bob - Oh yes,one more thing. - Faith is a gift (as in a belief in God). It doesn’t require one have an advanced degree in any particular area to receive it. One obtains faith (a free gift from God) by being open to it. Have you ever tried it, Bob?
Dear Bo. Each of the Birth Certificates fabricated and then released by Barry Sotero were clearly fakes. My local Restaurant doesn’t accept Fake IDs and neither do I. How is writing that a man was born in Kenya racist? If I write that a man was born in, say, Peru, is that racist; what if I write that a man was born in Bolivia, is that racist?
What if you had possession of an obvious fake ID that said you were a 92 year old Icleander (you are’t are you?) but your Uncle said you were born in the United States? Would it be wiser for me to believe your obviously fake ID or your Uncle? BTW, I am pretty sure it is not racist to write that you were born in the United States or Iceland, right?
Dear B. You are going to have to provide me with a list of what is and isn’t racist because I suspect that what you call racist is any act that reveals your ignorance which I do not consider an objective standard by which to judge any action.
And our maximum leader did say this is a muslim country. I posted a quote of his; his very own words. Was that racist? Is posting an accurate quote of the POTUS racist only if the POTUS is a Mulatto whereas posting a direct quote by, say, George W Bush, or, better yet, Jefferson Davis, is not racist?
These are very tough and demanding standards I must adhere to.
In fact, B, I feel a bit like Hal, the computer, and you are too much like Dave, and you make me very afraid. Please do not disassemble my brain, dave.
Dave,,,dave,,,dav..da…d…
@ Bob - I don’t take offense at your comments because of where they are coming from ....a very ignorant, insensitive and insecure person. Be happy in your make believe world while you can, Bob but I hope before you take your last breath God gives you the grace to repent and believe in Him. That’s what God does; gives us miserable sinners an invitation to eternal life.
JohnY…so you’re saying that if a priest is arrested without due process while protesting at an abortion clinic, that’s OK because it’s only a small violation of his rights. If a Catholic church is shut down because fundamentalists don’t like it…well…it’s only 1 church so that’s OK. And if only 1 newspaper is shut down for criticizing the govt…well that’s OK too cuz it’s only 1 paper. So that’s why we can allow the cross…because violations of the Constitution are OK if they’re small. Gotcha.
“Think about this. If Silverman’s logic is followed we should also make sure that any Star of David or any Jewish symbols are removed from the Holocaust Museum, which receives millions in federal funding.”
How is this ^^^^ Not the government establishing a religion???
Using the lame idea that permitting “a free expression of religion IS establishing a religion”...we certainly have NUMEROUS religions that the government is attempting to ‘establish’.
Sadly, many of today’s young adults have not been educated properly when it comes to the Constitution. They have been taught an ideology instead of genuine American history.
Spartacus it’s obvious you’re a racist, fringe lunatic. I never was into UFO’s, spontaneous human combustion or any of the other delusions and paranoid fears you nutters seem to get excited about. No, you didn’t post a quote. You posted a fragment. So, back to your Klan meeting where you can drool into your lobster bib while muttering about the CIA beaming thoughts into your tin foil hat
@Tim
If I had meant that I see no difference between their actions (killing people) and your actions (blog posting), I’d have put it that simply. Read what I wrote a few more times to get the nuance (hint: “for their religion”). Perhaps you might have understood me better had I stated it as “I see no difference between what they did being motivated by faith and what you are doing being motivated by faith”.
Your original claim was that atheists are jerks (you even used the word “bunch”) for thinking that 9/11 was faith based. I took exception to that and still do. I was baiting you on name-calling - that was the point. Christians hate when their hypocrisy is pointed out. I also asked you to explain how you acting on faith was different from their acting on faith which went unaddressed.
Your indignation at a non-existent slight indicates you are unlikely to be open-minded about the nature of faith. The persecution complex you suffer, not withstanding any passive-aggressive remarks on my part, seems deep-seeded.
I apologize - clearly you thought a post on a christian bog would not get challenged as long as you were joining the atheist bashing.
I am all for Thomas Jefferson’s wall of separation, but sometimes some atheist groups go too far and pull stunts for publicity.
POLL: Does a cross belong at the WTC site?
Vote: http://www.wepolls.com/p/1553378
Zadoc, the same can be said for believers. Believers have TV networks, radio networks, and even had one idiot predicting the end of the world recently.
@MK If you’re referring to the Art Institute in Chicago, where I work, it is a private institution not a public one like the WTC National Memorial and the quotes of the Dalai Llama on the stair-case are part of the larger exhibit of Eastern-Asian Buddhist Art.
Get rid of the stupid t-shape beam, the first amendment allows for the freedom of religion AND freedom from religion. You want to know what would be a better coping device? FREEDOM! LIBERTY! A symbol that can better demonstrate it! From crap like this!
I just want the atheists to know that when they continually say “there is no God”, they are actually acknowledging that there is. Otherwise why do they fight against something they say does not exist. If you don’t believe in any kind of god or religion, fine—-don’t—-you have that freedom and I have the freedom to ‘believe’.
If, to you, God does not exist, then why are you fighting against thin air? Why are you fighting against other people’s beliefs? Has it hurt you in any way? We all know that no matter your belief, there is good and bad in all people—in all religions, in all organization, etc., which is called “being human”. Isn’t this all just plain common sense?
I can’t believe how many athiests read articles on an orthodox Catholic website. (I recognize some of the names from other posts.) You guys must be Catholic stalkers. I think you all should go to National Catholic Reporter - the liberal website. You’d feel more comfortable there. Better yet stick to CNN.
Putting the cross in the Memorial is simply an acknowledgment that the cross was part of the story for millions of people. It’s not an establishment of religion, it’s simply recounting the history honestly.
I suspect many of the atheists know they’re going to lose this lawsuit eventually and that is the reason for much of their vitriolic language.
@YourStupidityIsShowing: I think you need to read your own comment. Here it is again:
“Very christian name-calling of you. As one of the “jerks”, I see no difference between what the radical islamists did for THEIR religion than you are attempting to do for yours.”
Now you are claiming some sort of righteous exposure of hypocrisy? Your comment lacks any nuance. It’s plain. Radical Islamists killed for their religion. What am I doing that is on par with that?
Or are you saying that the real crime was in the motivation and not the killing? That anything motivated by religion (e.g. feeding the poor) is no different than mass murder motivated by radical Islamism?
“Your indignation at a non-existent slight indicates you are unlikely to be open-minded about the nature of faith. The persecution complex you suffer, not withstanding any passive-aggressive remarks on my part, seems deep-seeded.
I apologize - clearly you thought a post on a christian bog would not get challenged as long as you were joining the atheist bashing.”
I don’t know what persecution complex I am suffering from or was revealed by my posting a link to the complaint, and calling a bunch of jerks “a bunch of jerks”. And I don’t see how any of your allegations apply to me, based on a few comments I posted.
I apologize that I responded to your “name-calling baiting” - Obviously you do not like people challenging your sense of intellectual superiority (does that make me sound like a jerk?)
“No, you didn’t post a quote. “
Dear Bob. Just a second…here is what I posted:
By JEFF ZELENY
HAHN, Germany — As President Obama prepared to leave Washington to fly to the Middle East, he conducted several television and radio interviews at the White House to frame the goals for a five-day trip, including the highly-anticipated speech Thursday at Cairo University in Egypt.
In an interview with Laura Haim on Canal Plus, a French television station, Mr. Obama noted that the United States also could be considered as “one of the largest Muslim countries in the world.”
Yep. That is a quote of the words of The POTUS. I can tell because the reporter identifies the speaker of those words as one “Mr Obama” (I assume he is referring to Barry Sotero) and then he puts quotes around the words spoken by one Mr. Obama.
So, I am afraid that despite your reflexive gainsaying of a fact that proves your ignorance, I am going to continue to insist that a quote is a quote.
However, to be as fair to you as you have been fair to me, i will note that the gentleman who wrote the news report has a surname that suggests he is Jewish and so clearly you are an antisemite in your repeated denials that what he quoted as the words or The POTUS are really not the words of the POTUS.
Bob. Why are you a holocaust denier?
@Tim.
You haven’t once challenged my intellectual superiority. Not even close. As a matter of fact, you have proven it over and over. Each reply you post gets more confused and further from the point.
You stated that the 9/11 perpetrators were not faith-based and those that thought so were jerks. I called you on your assertion. You failed to offer any evidence/reason why they were different from your faith-based actions. That’s a fail.
Everything you have written shows you have a persecution complex. I’ll stop feeding it in the hopes you recover. Good luck.
Christians wanting the cross… Live outside of yourself here in respect not just to atheists, but other religious followers. I’m sorry to break the news, but your religion is not superior to any other as this seems to exemplify. If this is erected I want a sculpture of The Flying Spaghetti Monster who helped me get pass the hard times of 9/11 to be placed next to the cross .
I live in China, things are quite despicable here but that’s due to the PTB. America on the other hand is amazingly despicable because its the people that are victimizing. It’ll get to the point over there where you’ll all soon be picking on each other for dressing in certain colours.
Such blatant prejudice from the article’s author—it’s shameful that such an intolerant voice supports Christianity and coexists in a nation that honors freedom of religion and the separation of church and state.
The sad fact is that it is religious zealotry and intolerance that brought down the buildings and snuffed out the lives of some 3,000 innocent people.
Now, having not learned the lesson the hard way, it is religious zeal at it again, this time from the Christians, who’d be better off supporting no explicit religious symbol on this site whatsoever.
YourStupidityIsShowing writes, in part, “Why is it ok for athiests [sic] to be labeled ‘Wacko’ in this article’s title? Your Christian [sic] hypocrisy is once again showing.” At the initial comment the commenter shows a loose grasp of an adjective applied to the noun. In the case of this article’s title, the adjective (“wacko”) denotes a subgroup (“atheists”). Clearly the author has identified a specific set of persons. Indeed the article points out the membership of that group according to the author. Further the commenter suggests the identification of a subgroup as hypocrisy. Clearly the commenter is unaware that the word “hypocrisy” describes play-actors who assume a persona on a stage which is not their own identity. Hugh Laurie is being hypocritical when he dons the persona of Dr. Greg House for filming. Knowing these two things about the commenter we can fully assess the assertion: “You haven’t once challenged my intellectual superiority.” Obviously there is a personal dictionary in use where words mean whatever she (he) wants them to mean.
@YourStupidityIsShowing: “You stated that the 9/11 perpetrators were not faith-based and those that thought so were jerks.”
I called whoever wrote paragraph 19 of the complaint a “bunch of jerks” for dragging all people of faith within the realm of responsibility for the 9/11 attacks. This was a cheap shot at religion and believers.
You stated that you saw no difference between murderous acts motivated by radical Islamists and any other acts motivated by faith. This is a fair interpretation of your comment. Here is your entire comment again:
“Very christian name-calling of you. As one of the “jerks”, I see no difference between what the radical islamists did for THEIR religion than you are attempting to do for yours. They did so because they had FAITH their god (who if I am not mistaken is the same as yours - just God 3.0) would reward them for their actions.”
You see no difference between what the radical Islamsists did (flying a plane into two buildings, killing thousands of people) and what I am doing (I’m not sure what you mean by “[what] you are attempting to do for yours”... writing comments?)
If you actually believe this, then you must be blinded by hatred (sorry, “frustration”) for believers (though, from your last post, I’m thinking it might by blindness due to pride).
It appears your hatred/frustration/pride is “deep-seeded” (I can tell these things from just a few comments), so there is not point in answering your ridiculous demand to show why all religious believers aren’t equivalent to the 9/11 terrorists.
Jim Lindelien: A better analogy is: the Trade Center was built to be a place of commerce. That place, and the people frequenting that place, became a target for deep hatred. After the destruction of the buildings and the subsequent cleanup, a group of people erected a cross in memoriam. That place, and the people frequenting that place, has become a target for deep hatred.
AMERICA IS A CHRISTIAN NATION !
http://growabrain.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/god_bless_america_1.jpg
@Peter A: Why are the Dakotas exploding behind Jesus? Oh well, North Dakota isn’t a state anyway.
It seems to me that atheists waste a lot of time filing lawsuits. Atheists have always seemed a little fanatical and weak to me as if their beliefs are so shaky that just the presence of a cross in their line of sight causes them to tremble and run to the lawyer. Kind of like those people who are afraid to have french fries in a happy meal because they can’t say no to their kids. Just another lame waste of the court system.
Joanne, perhaps you don’t value our constitutional freedoms. Perhaps in your world, pamppered and perfumed, with no sacrifices required, you retire to your fainting couch when someone dares to breath the words ‘religious freedom’. But our founding fathers knew that religious fanaticism could destroy a country. You may not love America. But I do.
Peter what are you going to do with the Jews? What do you have planned for them? One can only imagine what a Christian fanatic will do to Jews in a “Christian” nation.
Spartacus, your race hatred is all too obvious. But let’s look at your lie a bit closer. Here’s a nice website which contains Obama’s quote AND the context: http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/06/from-the-fact-check-desk-president-obama-and-muslims-in-america.html
Turns out he didn’t say what you claimed. Sorry. Back to your BIlderberger conspiracies. What he ACTUALLY said was:
“if you actually took the number of Muslims Americans, we’d be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world.”
So you’re a liar. No surprise given your view of blacks who have political power
Matt Archibold seems to think that violation of minority rights is protected by the Constitution.
Guess he’s unaware that the Bill of Rights exists PRECISELY to protect minority rights. Including HIS. You Catholics seem to forget that, if America ever DOES become a “Christian” country, your Church will disappear since many Protestants are all too willing to say the Church is not Christian. Bleat all you want about the myth of America being “Christian” but to many, you guys AREN’T Christians. You’re playing with fire. But you’re blind and ignorant
Sue you give yourself too much credit. Patriots don’t care if there is/isn’t a God WRT the constitution. What matters is what the RIGHTS of people are. It’s a simple matter of law that you do not have the right to oppress anyone because of their religion. Putting up a cross is an establishment of religion. Are you people so blind you hate our Constitution??
TG is interested in the fact people who disagree with his radical Catholicism are open minded enough to read this website, whereas he’d prefer it to be an echo chamber where everyone would be little bobblehead dolls.
To anyone who states that Atheists are intimidated by crosses blah blah blah blah, YOU are wrong just as much as the Bible is. Enough said.
@Bob - “TG is interested in the fact people who disagree with his radical Catholicism” There is no such thing as “radical Catholicism”; there is just Catholicsm! Period.
@ Bob - “Bleat all you want about the myth of America being “Christian” but to many, you guys AREN’T Christians.” FOR THE FINAL TIME, AMERICA IS A CHRISTIAN NATION! Is it a Federal holiday for the Jews, Muslims, or athesists? No it is not. It’s a Federal holiday because most Americans celebrate Christmas.
MARY M.
I agree. This is The Christian Nation and anyone who begs to differ are enemies of it. Who dares take a symbol of the religion that represents this whole Nation down? I am appauled by these non-believes. You’ve got to be f’ed up with these idiots huh?
Michael Smith exhibits the type of hatred of ‘infidels’ that caused Osama Bin Laden to kill 3000 Americans. This is not a Christian nation. There are Jews, Muslims, Hindus, atheists. Nowhere in the Constituotion is the word ‘Christian’ mentioned. So bleat all you want. But we NON CHRISTIANS don’t give a DAMN about your “Christian nation” mythology. The Founding Fathers knew about you.
MaryM tell you what. You go find in the Constitution where it says we’re a Christian country. And in many places in NY and other areas they have JEWISH holidays. By the way, Mary, you gonna gas the Jews?
Stupid(ity),
And yes, putting up a cross on PUBLIC lands or with PUBLIC funds is forcing it on my children.
Just wondering how you feel about gay pride parades? You know, private displays on public property, forcing it on my children? Do you have as hard a time explaining to your kids what a “Cross” means as I do explaining why Bill and Bob are wearing dresses and high heels (or just a thong) and dry humping each other on a float on Halsted Street? Or how about public schools teaching my kids how to use a condom and where to get contraception behind my back…all funded by moi, the taxpayer? Do you have a problem with that? Or maybe it’s okay for those things because they don’t offend you? Just curious.
<i>You are spewing false propaganda regarding the Christian connection of Hitler as well as the Norwegian terrorist.
<i>
I wonder how many of the atheists here were baptized Catholic but have renounced their religion. Is it safe to say that you are Catholic Atheists?
Hitler was also Jewish. He didn’t mass murder 6,000,000 people in the name of Christianity. He murdered them in the name of Euthanasia, a child of Atheism.
I notice you didn’t bother defending anyone else on that list.
MK you really are desperate aren’t you? Parades are not govt establishment of religion. They are free speech. Not too bright here, are we?
@Bob - I don’t need to look in the Constitution. There are no Jewish Federal holidays. One area closing down(such as Orthodox Jewish communites) does not make it a national holiday. That’s a local issue within a confined community. Christmas is a Federal holiday because most people would not be in school and they would not be at work because they would be home celebrating a Christan holiday which is Christmas! Just how disturbed are you, Bob to suggest I would gas the Jews? I don’t hate the Jews or anyone, Bob. But you, on the other hand have a great deal of anger in your heart towards Christians and in particular Catholics which is why you spend as much time as you do posting on Catholic blogs and in particular the ones that are orthodox. You just like the aspect of confrontation which you probably would not get over at the National Catholic Reporter. You dislike “us” because “we” challenge people to submit to the laws of God and you just cannot stand that. That’s the real story, Bob and not all of this nonsense about the WTC and the steal beams. You just want to challenge anything and everyhing. You wouldn’t care what topic it was just so that you could “stick it to those damn Catholics”. I’m calling it like it is, Bob so why don’t you. You really need to address all this anger you have in your heart. Authentic Christians don’t hate, Bob - they love because God is love. I’m sorry that you just don’t see that. It’s really very sad that someone needs to live with so much anger.
Steve,
I’m an atheist, but this lawsuit is retarded. REAL atheists don’t give a flying fudge what others do with their belief structure.
Thank you. I love rational atheists. I think you guys are often really intelligent and I love debating with you. The fact that you can admit that this particular suit is nonsense tells me that you are able to see Truth and recognize it. It’s all about Truth. Chesterton used to debate GBShaw all the time. They’d go at it tooth and nail, and then sit down and have a beer together. I admire anyone who can argue the argument without debasing the person. There are times and places where we overstep our bounds and I agree that we all need to respect each other. This just isn’t one of those times. Crucifixes in court houses? I wouldn’t want them there either, (lol…partly because it would be an insult to the Crucifix, but I digress) but this is an entirely different situation. These are people that are hurting and using anything that gives them comfort. It’s a tragedy that some people want to take that away from them. As I said, if it were the victims or families themselves that were complaining, I’d take it more seriously. But they aren’t. So the whole thing smacks of an agenda and not some real offense. Peace, and thanks for speaking up.
This whole “forcing it on the public” is completely idiotic. Atheists are acting as if by the mere sight of th cross the will be forcebly converted to christianity. If it’s just garbage then why the big deal? do you make such a fuss over every bit of construction remains? wacko atheists indeed.
To all believers: let us, as believers, pray for all who are not and ask God to tap them on the shoulder, let them know He IS and that He loves them.
John Crysler,
That’s just another flavor of Christianity. The point stands. Also, you have the Anglican church and all the different varieties.
No John. It’s not just another flavor of Christianity. It is the Church that Christ instituted. Every other Christian denomination came from US. And what the heck does “you have the Anglican church” mean?????? What varieties? This is why I tried to set you straight in an aside. So that you and others wouldn’t continue to make such ignorant statements. If you’re going to attack something, at least have a fundamental understanding of what it is that you’re attacking! Sheesh!
MaryM there are no CHRISTIAN federal holidays either. Christians are the majority in this country and a holiday is a cultural tradition, not a law. And what rights do you have as a Christian that Jews don’t? NONE! Not a single one. THAT is why this is NOT a Christian country. You don’t have any rights that other AMERICANS have. There is NO provision in law…NONE…that says this is a CHristian country. With your hatred of ‘infidels’ it’s obvious you think Americans who AREN’T Catholics are 2nd class citizens. There is NOTHING in US law that says you’re right. So you’re WRONG
Perhaps Laura feels the Constitution is ‘wacko’ but some of us take it seriously! SHE may hate the 1st amendment and want to force religion on others, but I’ve been to Malaysia. I’ve seen her type of govt. This is America and CHristians don’t have special rights!
bob: I’ve been pondering a question and just cannot control the impulse anymore: is Bob your uncle?
Mike,
If you’re referring to the Art Institute in Chicago, where I work, it is a private institution not a public one like the WTC National Memorial and the quotes of the Dalai Llama on the stair-case are part of the larger exhibit of Eastern-Asian Buddhist Art.
I honestly apologize. My husband just confirmed what you said. I didn’t realize that it was privately owned. BTW, what a cool job you must have! I love that place (Dali Lama quotes and all). And in all fairness, the walls are adorned with Catholic Art and when you had the medieval exhibit you had quite a few Catholic Relics and artifacts from old Churches. So yeah, it’s actually pretty fair. If anything there is probably more Catholic Art than any other. So again, I apologize.
You know, I’ve been reading all of these comments…first, let me say that I am a devoted Catholic who loves her Church, her Faith and above all her God. But both sides are making some seriously misguided claims.
On our side…We are not a “Christian country”. We are a country that happens to have a majority of Christians, but that is not the same thing. We are also a country founded on some Christian ideals, but even this does not make us a Christian country. Those ideals are Eternal Truths and belong to all of humanity. Yes, the Christian Faith recognizes them and knows who authored them, but most civilizations have the same codes of ethics whether they are Muslim, Hindu or Christians. The ten commandments are Divine Law, but one doesn’t have to know the author to admire the painting. Call it Universal Law, Ethics, Morality or Religion…a rose by any other name…So while this country might have been founded on what are often considered Christian “principles” it was never meant to be a “Christian Country”.
Also, the Catholic church does not advocate a Theocracy. She is as adamant about separation of Church and State as any atheist. Bob has already pointed out some of the dangers of merging the two and he is right on that.
The other side…no one here is truly advocating for “Christian Law” (at least I hope not). By speaking our minds about what is right and what is wrong, we are simply exercising the same rights afforded to every other American. This particular cross is not your typical blending of state and religion. It is a unique situation. Simply human decency says that it is harming no one and helping a great many. And as has been pointed out, it is part of the “history” of 911.
I would also hope that some of you who confuse Protestants with Catholics would do a little homework. It is true that there are some denominations that are a little extreme and seem to truly want a “Christian Country” but we are Catholics and that is NOT our aim. This is a Catholic blog. Keep that in mind.
Lastly, Atheists claim to be good for “goodness sake” and Christians claim to love and follow Christ, but reading these comments…? I’m beginning to wonder…Maybe we’re all nuts!
Deep breaths, wait before you hit submit, and remember, while we may not all agree on everything, we are sharing the planet and everyone would do well to remember that real live feeling human beings are on the other sides of these keyboards.
That is all.
I would like to argue back against the atheist naysayers who insist that the country was not founded on religion and that religion must be quashed, with a quote from George Washington’s Farewell Address:
“Of all the dispositions and habits, which lead to political prosperity, Religion and Morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of Men and Citizens. The mere Politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connexions with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked, Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths, which are the instruments of investigation in Courts of Justice? And let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect, that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.”
Furthermore, Benjamin Franklin was the one who started the tradition of a prayer opening every session of Congress. The First Continental Congress also had a Bible printed for everyone in Congress, and insisted it be also given to every school.
You should also check out the Library of Congress exhibit website on “Religion and the Founding of the American Republic” http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/rel06.html .
Furthermore, if the government is not allowed to support religion, why is it that the government continues to pay for the travel expenses and security for the Jade Buddha, which is traveling the country? Why are there welcoming ceremonies funded by every city it goes to? Yes, the government also pays for the travel and expenses of the pope, but he’s the ruler of country, a diplomat, so there’s a secular reason for that. A religious statue? Not so much. Even Catholics pay privately for the travel of the statue of Our Lady of Fatima. IMHO, if the Jade Buddha is given travel funds, then a cross can be allowed on public land.
No one cares what Washington said. He was not involved in writing the constitution and GOd does not appear in that document. Keep flailing! You just keep digging a deeper hole. Washingtom may have thought religion was useful but his ideas are ABSENT from the Constitution. Tough! Live with it. As to the Dalai Lama, that’s foreign aid. The DL doesnt live in the US. What’s the matter with you? Are you really so dense you can’t figure this out??
I think it a bit rich that an organization that harbors and conceals child rapists should call anyone “wacko”.
bob says “[Washington] was not involved in writing the constitution and GOd [sic]does not appear in that document.” False on both accounts: Washington signed the document—writing—and the document states: “Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven . . .”
STeveP hangs his whole argument on an irrelevancy. God does not appear in the body of the constitution, which he readily admits. So his argument collapsed. But Steve is correct about Washington signing the document. So he’s wrong about GOd appearing in any law whatsoever in the constitution. THanks, Steve, for confirming your failure
Hey BOB I was actually trying to reel in MARY M, but the little fish didn’t hook.
Also MARY M
“You dislike “us” because “we” challenge people to submit to the laws of God and you just cannot stand that.”
You do realize the Bible was written by man. You probably submit to a man pretty well. Get off the internet and get me a sandwich!!!
This atheist group completely has the right to question whether this display has constitutional merit. Personally, though, I think some people get a little too hung up on the separation of church and state. It’s unquestionably important, but it’s not absolute. It can’t be. For better or worse, religion is a fundamental component of our history, and it continues to have a fundamental impact on our society. Excluding items from a museum - a place dedicated to preserving a historical account of a particular event or time period - because it has religious associations seems silly to me. I think this cross is historically relevant. It’s a piece of the wreckage. It has an interesting backstory. It’s recognizable to a lot of people. And I think people in the future will be interested in viewing and learning about this piece. I can see why some would have problem if it was the only item on display that had any religious association - that may lead some to infer a religious preference of the museum itself. However, it looks like the museum will display other items that have a range of religious associations. Should the museum make a point to include items from all the religions of the people who were involved in this event? I don’t know. I think people will realize that not everybody in the towers were Christian. If an item, whether it has religious associations or not, will serve to provide a better account of what happened, then it seems reasonable to me to include it in the museum.
bob: but, but, but you wrote “God [sic] does not appear in the document.” Now you claim you meant the body of the document! How do I know you really meant that? How do I know that Christ is not present in the Constitution of the United States as silently but as apparently meaningful as your codicil?
Steve, steve steve…uh what’s the purpose of the constitution? Is it a trivial document that you seem to think it is that exists merely to have a small line about a date? Or is it the body of laws that governs our nation? You seem to have the view the constitution is a joke. I take it rather seriously. You ignore the 1st amendment and seek the destruction both of our country and your church. Your argument centers on an irrelevancy. A triviality. Me? I look at the LAWS. The laws that you despise. GUess that’s the difference between us. I’m a patriot. You’re a religious fanatic
bob: The question is: How do I know that Christ is not present in the Constitution of the United States as silently but as apparently meaningful as your codicil?
Steve, if you regard Christ with the same trivial disdain you hold for our constitution, it really doesn’t matter, does it? Both, it seems, are a joke to you.
bob: You wrote “God [sic] does not appear in the document.” I pointed out that, indeed, Christ is referenced. Why do you get to define what the word “document” means? Why do you get to back-peddle and say “I really meant . . .”?
Steve Christ isn’t referenced. THere is no mention of god in any constitutional law. Is your view of God as trivial as your view of the constitution? Oh…Christ isn’t mentioned. You backpedaling now?
bob: You don’t seem to want to answer straightforward questions. I’ll chalk it up to the supposition that you’re angry at being named the same as slang for a unit of currency in Britain. Get some sleep.
Supports keep saying the cross was “just part of the rubble” and should be displayed. Would they mind then if it was displayed upside down?
Michael Smith - “You dislike “us” because “we” challenge people to submit to the laws of God and you just cannot stand that.” You do realize the Bible was written by man. You probably submit to a man pretty well. Get off the internet and get me a sandwich!!! Michael, you’re not too bright. The Bible is the inspired Word of God written down by humans. I don’t submit to anyone but God.
Nice try.
@Lou - “Supports keep saying the cross was “just part of the rubble” and should be displayed. Would they mind then if it was displayed upside down?”
I wouldn’t mind,St. Peter was crucified in that way; but I’m sure you knew that.
I think it a bit rich that an organization that harbors and conceals child rapists should call anyone “wacko”.
Lol,throw in a “It’s Bush’s fault” and you’ve pretty much covered “I’ve got nothing to say so I’ll fall back on the proverbial Red Herring”. Phooey!
I am so fed up with reading about atheists trying to cram their world view down everyone’s throats. How pathetic—going around fighting against everything. Why don’t they focus on being positive instead of negative?
Officious bunch of busy-bodies is really all that they are, but… ah… now they’ve got the police state at their beck and call.
So Grace’s view is that it’s wrong for people to stand on their Constitutional rights. Golly, Grace, why don’t you give up your right to freedom of religion and this whole debate would disappear! Police state? Why are the religious so often paranoid?
Bob,
Just cuz your paranoid, doesn’t mean they aren’t after ya… ;)
Well, I don’t think the internet athiests who have visited this site have proven anything other than the main point of Matt’s post: Athiests (like the ones demanding removal of the cross) are rude jerks.
“...so you’re saying that if a priest is arrested without due process, blah, blah, blah… If a Catholic church blah, blah, blah… if only 1 newspaper blah, blah, blah…...because violations of the Constitution are OK if they’re small.”
NO that is NOT what I said. I said that the cross in question does not RISE to the Level of the Establishment Clause; hence there is no violation of the Constitution.
It’s like saying I can’t drive my car on public streets because I have a bumper sticker with a cross on it. That too would be a misapplication of the Constitution. And don’t say that can’t happen, because it has begun in our schools. You can wear any t-shirt you want UNLESS it has a Christian theme.
Secondly, we are a Christian Nation because the majority of the people are Christian. Just like Libya is Islamic/Muslim country because most of the people are Islamic/Muslim. No one has claimed that our Government is Christian. We live under a democracy while Libyans live under a dictator.
As to any objection of the Cross being displayed upside down. YES I would very strongly object! The reason being is the Cross was not found upside down. We should not alter what we found there. To alter the cross would alter the truth of the story.
Michael Smith, you last little rant crossed the line. This Hate Crime should be removed from the blog and perhaps he should be stopped from posting here again.
And bob, let me save you the trouble… Constitution, Constitution, Constitution!
Michael Smith: Stop sexually harassing females. You are crude and immature.
MARY M I was also just thinking I could’ve been tortured or killed for blasphemy for saying what I just said way back when and it would have been fine for the sake of religion. O you gotta love religion.
JohnY…again you impress us with the fact you sit on the SCOTUS. Oh…wait…you don’t. What is ‘rise to the level’? What does that mean? So that’s a pretty much a useless point, isn’t it? Kind of like being slightly pregnant. A ‘small’ constitutional violation is STILL a violation. You haven’t explained why it’s NOT. And while the majority in this nation is Christian, that does NOT give them special rights in law. This is NOT a democracy and there is no dictatorship of the proletariat or any other imagined body of laws the gives the majority the right to take away the rights of the minority (and, by the way, YOU are a minority, being a CATHOLIC). So I am protecting YOUR rights while you sit here trying to destroy them. Truly ironic!
Repeated comments by atheists: “We don’t think that anyone should follow the rules of an old book written by people long since dead and we sneer at anyone who does!”
Posts by the same atheists: “Well, we don’t care about public opinion or precedent, the Constitution (old book written by people long since dead) say ___”
Gotta love irony.
Secularism is a religion, so could all you atheists please stop pushing it on me! Thanks! God Bless!
On page 221 in David Mamet’s book “The Secret Knowledge” he quotes Christopher Hollis who wrote in 1936:
“The left is atheist, and simply because it is atheist, its religious fanaticism is worse than the other fanaticisms of history. For the romantic of the past has sometimes, if all too rarely,has been restrained by the reality that God is truth. But the atheist fanatic has no reason for such restraint. There is no reason in principle why the revotutionary atheist should regard truth, and it does not seem he does so in practice.”
Sixty five years later it is continues to be a brilliant observation. This is why fanatical atheism which seeks to stamp out all mention of God in the public square is to be a concern to all.
Let me just say that I find this whole argument absolutely RIDICULOUS. I’m 15 years old, and even I know that there must be a separation of church and state. Guess what? The government supporting the cross being displayed on public property is NOT separation! It’s downright mingling! I’m Jewish, and most certainly do not find comfort in the cross that was left in piles of rubble after the attacks. It’s totally fine if Christians want to keep it as a testimony to their beliefs—they can put it out in the open, right in front of a church, for all I care! (That’s why we have free speech, after all.) But the moment you start making false claims that this has nothing to do with religion, that non-Christians have no problem with the issue, or that Atheists want to erase religion from history (as some commenters have), I have a major problem. And, by the way, it is most certainly not the same as requesting that all Stars of David be removed from the Holocaust Museum. The Nazis persecuted their 6 million victims BECAUSE of their religion, so it is appropriate that it be displayed in a museum that is all about said persecution. 9/11 didn’t happen because we are a “Christian nation” (so offensive, by the way). It happened because we we’re Americans.
@Jay Steinberg: We are a nation founded on Judeo-Christian principles. We are not, therefore correctly called a Christian nation even if the majority of citizens are self proclaimed followers of Christ(whatever that means considering that the Norway assassin claims to be a Christian…NOT!!!). BTW, the separation of church and state was to keep the state from imposing a religion on the people. It was to ensure freedom of religion not give us freedom from religion. In recent times it has been used to rid all mention of God from the public square. This was not the intention of the founding fathers or in the founding documents. BTW, you may find David Mamet’s book, “The Secret Knowledge” of interest. He is a Pulitzer prize winning author, an acclaimed playwright, screen writer, film director and essayist. And he is Jewish. I have found his book fascinating. I bet you would too.
bob, I didn’t mention the Dalai Lama, who is more than a religious figure, he is a political figure, one whom I very much respect. He was a great friend to Bl. John Paul II and Bl. Teresa of Calcutta. What I mentioned was the Jade Buddha, which is a giant statue. For people to celebrate and fund a statue is the same as celebrating and funding a cross. I do support that, but I think it’s unfair that no atheist foundations have made any comment on that situation, but continue to go after crosses.
Note that the government also pays for the chaplains in the armed forces, as well. Is that a support of religion? Yes. Is it imposing religion? No.
Also, from the Library of Congress site:
“Aitken’s Bible Endorsed by Congress
“The war with Britain cut off the supply of Bibles to the United States with the result that on Sept. 11, 1777, Congress instructed its Committee of Commerce to import 20,000 Bibles from ‘Scotland, Holland or elsewhere.’ On January 21, 1781, Philadelphia printer Robert Aitken (1734-1802) petitioned Congress to officially sanction a publication of the Old and New Testament which he was preparing at his own expense. Congress ‘highly approve the pious and laudable undertaking of Mr. Aitken, as subservient to the interest of religion . . . in this country, and . . . they recommend this edition of the bible to the inhabitants of the United States.’ This resolution was a result of Aitken’s successful accomplishment of his project.”
Congress had bibles imported, and then made a resolution recommending a bible printed in US.
On July 13, 1787, Congress passed the famous Northwest Ordinance. Article 3 of the Ordinance contained the following: “Religion, Morality and knowledge being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, Schools and the means of education shall be forever encouraged.”
When instituting the prayer for the opening session of Congress, Benjamin Franklin stated, “The longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this Truth—that God governs in the Affairs of Men.” “I also believe,” Franklin continued, that “without his concurring Aid, we shall succeed in this political Building no better than the Builders of Babel.”
“On July 4, 1776, Congress appointed Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams ‘to bring in a device for a seal for the United States of America.’ Franklin’s proposal adapted the biblical story of the parting of the Red Sea (left). Jefferson first recommended the ‘Children of Israel in the Wilderness, led by a Cloud by Day, and a Pillar of Fire by night. . . .’ He then embraced Franklin’s proposal and rewrote it (right). Jefferson’s revision of Franklin’s proposal was presented by the committee to Congress on August 20. Although not accepted these drafts reveal the religious temper of the Revolutionary period. Franklin and Jefferson were among the most theologically liberal of the Founders, yet they used biblical imagery for this important task.”
The exhibit also has the draft of Thomas Jefferson’s letter about the “wall of separation”. It was labored over. “That Jefferson consulted two New England politicians about his messages indicated that he regarded his reply to the Danbury Baptists as a political letter, not as a dispassionate theoretical pronouncement on the relations between government and religion.” Furthermore, “The words, ‘wall of separation,’ appear just above the section of the letter that Jefferson circled for deletion. In the deleted section Jefferson explained why he refused to proclaim national days of fasting and thanksgiving, as his predecessors, George Washington and John Adams, had done. In the left margin, next to the deleted section, Jefferson noted that he excised the section to avoid offending ‘our republican friends in the eastern states’ who cherished days of fasting and thanksgiving.”
In 1801, Congress sent minister Absalom Jones “a donation of $186, collected from members of the House and Senate, to assist in promoting the mission of Jones’s ‘St. Thomases African Church in Philadelphia.’”
http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/religion.html
Moohchild, as I said, supporting the Dalai Lama is foreign aid. He’s not an American citzen and he doesn’t live here. The military is subject to its own rules and chaplains are a service to troops. They’re not in the ‘public square’. This is not Christian nation. You might remind yourself that only secular nations are free. There has never..repeat NEVER…been a free religious state in history. Not once. And I might remind you of the Treaty of Tripoli where the govt of the US wrote to Libya stating this is NOT a Christian nation. Yes we had state govts that had religion. But these were invalidated by the SCOTUS. And AGAIN I remind you CATHOLICS that YOU are a MINORITY. Establishment of a state religion would be PROTESTANT and would DESTROY your church! You want that?
Mary Sallerce, yes you’re correct this is NOT an Xtian nation. However, the 1st amendment was also to protect us FROM religion. Jefferson knew full well of the existence of atheists. He wrote that it mattered not to him what God someone worshipped, or if they worshipped none at all.
There simply has to be a reason this part of rubble that just happens to be in the shape of a cross still exists, and not tossed out with the rest of the remains. In the name of religion, there should be some sort of symbol (man-made or otherwise) of other faiths that were affected by 9/11.
If the cross is not allowed at the site, then certainly should be given to the state of New York for a church building. Not sure if a Corpus can be attached, or would even be appropriate.
Not sure why Catholic monk blessed it, when it’s not a Crucifix. Should be “blessed” by other mainstream Christians as well.
@Bob: I repeat, the Separation of church and state is to give Americans freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion.
@Moonchild: Re: the Dalai Lama being a political figure. Yes, so is the Pope. The Vatican is a City State and as such is part of the Untited Nations. This is why he can speak at the UN and why UN delegates visit the Pope in Rome on official business.
From our Nation’s origin, prayer has been a prominent
part of governmental ceremonies and proclamations. The
Declaration of Independence, the document marking our
birth as a separate people, “appeal[ed] to the Supreme Judge
of the world for the rectitude of our intentions” and avowed
“a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence.” In
his first inaugural address, after swearing his oath of office
on a Bible, George Washington deliberately made a prayer a
part of his first official act as President:
“t would be peculiarly improper to omit in this first
official act my fervent supplications to that Almighty
Being who rules over the universe, who presides in the
councils of nations, and whose providential aids can supply
every human defect, that His benediction may consecrate
to the liberties and happiness of the people of the
United States a Government instituted by themselves
for these essential purposes.”
Such supplications have been a characteristic feature of inaugural
addresses ever since. Thomas Jefferson, for example,
prayed in his first inaugural address: “[M]ay that Infinite
Power which rules the destinies of the universe lead our
councils to what is best, and give them a favorable issue for
your peace and prosperity.” In his second inaugural
address, Jefferson acknowledged his need for divine
guidance and invited his audience to join his prayer:
“I shall need, too, the favor of that Being in whose hands
we are, who led our fathers, as Israel of old, from their
native land and planted them in a country flowing with
all the necessaries and comforts of life; who has covered
our infancy with His providence and our riper years
with His wisdom and power, and to whose goodness I
ask you to join in supplications with me that He will so
enlighten the minds of your servants, guide their councils,
and prosper their measures that whatsoever they
do shall result in your good, and shall secure to you the
peace, friendship, and approbation of all nations.”
Similarly, James Madison, in his first inaugural address,
placed his confidence
“in the guardianship and guidance of that Almighty
Being whose power regulates the destiny of nations,
whose blessings have been so conspicuously dispensed
to this rising Republic, and to whom we are bound to
address our devout gratitude for the past, as well as our
fervent supplications and best hopes for the future.”
Our national celebration of Thanksgiving likewise dates
back to President Washington.
The day after the First Amendment was proposed,
Congress urged President Washington to proclaim ‘a
day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by
acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal
favours of Almighty God.’ President Washington proclaimed
November 26, 1789, a day of thanksgiving to
‘offe[r] our prayers and supplications to the Great Lord
and Ruler of Nations, and beseech Him to pardon our
national and other transgressions ...
This tradition of Thanksgiving Proclamations—with their
religious theme of prayerful gratitude to God—has been
adhered to by almost every President.
The other two branches of the Federal Government also
have a long-established practice of prayer at public events.
As we detailed in Marsh, congressional sessions have opened
with a chaplain’s prayer ever since then. And this Court’s own sessions have
opened with the invocation “God save the United States and
this Honorable Court” since the days of Chief Justice Marshall.
The Framers were indeed opposed to coercion of religious
worship by the National Government; but, as their own sponsorship
of nonsectarian prayer in public events demonstrates,
they understood that speech is not coercive; the
listener may do as he likes.
From our Nation’s origin, prayer has been a prominent
part of governmental ceremonies and proclamations. The
Declaration of Independence, the document marking our
birth as a separate people, “appeal[ed] to the Supreme Judge
of the world for the rectitude of our intentions” and avowed
“a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence.” In
his first inaugural address, after swearing his oath of office
on a Bible, George Washington deliberately made a prayer a
part of his first official act as President:
“t would be peculiarly improper to omit in this first
official act my fervent supplications to that Almighty
Being who rules over the universe, who presides in the
councils of nations, and whose providential aids can supply
every human defect, that His benediction may consecrate
to the liberties and happiness of the people of the
United States a Government instituted by themselves
for these essential purposes.”
Such supplications have been a characteristic feature of inaugural
addresses ever since. Thomas Jefferson, for example,
prayed in his first inaugural address: “[M]ay that Infinite
Power which rules the destinies of the universe lead our
councils to what is best, and give them a favorable issue for
your peace and prosperity.” In his second inaugural
address, Jefferson acknowledged his need for divine
guidance and invited his audience to join his prayer:
“I shall need, too, the favor of that Being in whose hands
we are, who led our fathers, as Israel of old, from their
native land and planted them in a country flowing with
all the necessaries and comforts of life; who has covered
our infancy with His providence and our riper years
with His wisdom and power, and to whose goodness I
ask you to join in supplications with me that He will so
enlighten the minds of your servants, guide their councils,
and prosper their measures that whatsoever they
do shall result in your good, and shall secure to you the
peace, friendship, and approbation of all nations.”
Similarly, James Madison, in his first inaugural address,
placed his confidence
“in the guardianship and guidance of that Almighty
Being whose power regulates the destiny of nations,
whose blessings have been so conspicuously dispensed
to this rising Republic, and to whom we are bound to
address our devout gratitude for the past, as well as our
fervent supplications and best hopes for the future.”
Our national celebration of Thanksgiving likewise dates
back to President Washington.
The day after the First Amendment was proposed,
Congress urged President Washington to proclaim ‘a
day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by
acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal
favours of Almighty God.’ President Washington proclaimed
November 26, 1789, a day of thanksgiving to
‘offe[r] our prayers and supplications to the Great Lord
and Ruler of Nations, and beseech Him to pardon our
national and other transgressions ...
This tradition of Thanksgiving Proclamations—with their
religious theme of prayerful gratitude to God—has been
adhered to by almost every President.
The other two branches of the Federal Government also
have a long-established practice of prayer at public events.
Congressional sessions have opened
with a chaplain’s prayer ever since then. And the Court’s own sessions have
opened with the invocation “God save the United States and
this Honorable Court” since the days of Chief Justice Marshall.
The Framers were indeed opposed to coercion of religious
worship by the National Government; but, as their own sponsorship
of nonsectarian prayer in public events demonstrates,
they understood that speech is not coercive; the
listener may do as he likes.
spartacus you claim Obama’s relatives (strangely not including his MOTHER) say he was born in Kenya. That means you’re a ‘birther’. All birthers are RACISTS by definition. You’re a racist. So back to your klan meetng and stop sullying this blog with your RACIST claptrap. There are HONEST people here who disagree on points. You’re a Klan member
bob: Are you still angry you’re named after a hair style?
Not sure why Catholic monk blessed it,
Anything can be blessed. Candles, homes, dogs, crosses, salt, water, medals…there is no moratorium on blessing crosses without the corpus.
Ron Curry the DoI is not law. ANd I don’t know how many times I have to remind you CATHOLICS you are a MINORITY. Yep you are. You think a state religion WON"T destroy your church? Well, it always has. You people are so stupidly arrogant to assume everyone’s going to be kissy kissy with Catholics with a state religion. This is a SECULAR state. THere is NO special protection for Xtians. None. No prayer in public schools. No creationism. Ron, bleat all you want. The FACT is under LAW this is NOT a CHristian country. If this WAS, all the founders had to do was put it in the Constitution. They didn’t. Get over it.
Mary, bleat all you want about freedom FROM religion but you Christians have NO special rights under law. If there IS go ahead and cite it. Your cliche is exactly that. In fact, it would be in MY interests to have a state religion. The Catholic Church would be DESTROYED. Read those words again, Mary. Are you REALLY so DUMB as to think the Catholic Church would survive when PROTESTANTISM is the state church? Mary, again, you REALLY need to get educated. You’re historically illiterate.
bob: Why does the Constitution have the text “. . . by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven . . .”?
Mary is historically sound. 2000 years and all it’s vissicitudes and the Catholic church stands, Bob, you can enlighten your ignorance by reading the words Jesus spoke to Peter when he established the Church. If the gates of He’ll will not prevail against it, all your railings are just spitting in the wind and to your own despite.
Great posts, Ron and Mary.
Maggie, I don’t care what Jesus wrote. He’s irrelevant. Only the Constitution is relevant. ANd it forbids a state religion. Jesus is dead. The Constitution isn’t. I’ll go with the Constitution. ANd I don’t know how many times I have to remind you Wahabi Catholics that your church would DIE in a Christian America. Historically sound? You’re barely literate enough to SPELL history
The Catholic Church, Bob, has the perfect term for you: Invincible Ignorance. You seem to enjoy wasting time and words to vent your anger. I do not need that. May the Holy Spirit dispel your anger and ignorance and comfort you with Truth. BTW, when Congress could not agree on the formation of the Constitution, they took days off to pray. And so we have the greatest government structure in recorded history. Nevertheless nothing created by man is more than dust compared to the will of God and it is He who will always have the final Word.
Maggie, I’m a Patriot. You’re not. You’re a Christianist who wants to destroy America and make it like Saudi Arabia. Fortunately that’s not going to happen. You call it anger when a patriot defends this country. YES you’re right. I love this country. You don’t. You despise it because it’s not a theocracy. And if the Continental Congress thought your idiot God was so important they could have ended this debate 225 years ago by putting him in the Constitution. Too bad for you they DIDN’T, did they Maggie? Where is he? Where is it stated in the constitution that this is a Xtian country? Oh, it’s NOT. And the will of God is irrelevant. I am fighting for YOUR freedom. You’re just a dumb, ignorant hick who has NO idea about freedom or history
Bob, actually I am a tea partier. And that is the only thing you know of me besides my name, religion, and that I go to this website. Of all else you are invincibly ignorant and I will not waste another post on you. God bless you.
bob: Why such vitriol? Are you angry because BOB is an acronym for beasts-of-burden?
Yes, Maggie, I knew you were a tea partier…the most America hating party in the US today. A party dedicated to enshrining the rich and destroying AMerica to protect the rich. Who needs Al Qaida when we have you?
bob: I realize there were a number of words to parse so let’s try a shorter question: why is “in the Year of our Lord” in the Constitution of the United States?
SteveP you’re not too bright are you? First you said Jesus Christ was in the constitution. Now you admit you’re wrong. Now you’re desperately trying to use a triviality as if it has some bearing on the issue. If that’s your argument have at it!
Jesus is dead. The Constitution isn’t.
ummmm…pssst…Bob…Jesus was a person. He is dead. It is His words that were being quoted. The founders of our country were persons. They are dead. It is the words of the Constitution that you are quoting. The Constitution is not alive. It never was. It’s words on paper. Just wanted to let you know so you didn’t continue to sound like an a**. Well, in this instance anyway. Too late for the other stuff…carry on.
First you said Jesus Christ was in the constitution.
Ummmmmm….Psssst…Bob…The year of Our Lord? “Lord” refers to Jesus Christ. You know, the guy that our entire calendar is based off of? That is all.
bob: If you’d attend Liturgy you’d know that formal prayers to God the Father end with the petition “through our Lord Jesus Christ . . .” Does “in the Year of our Lord,” in the Constitution of the United States, refer to King George III?
MK..uh Jesus never wrote a word. NOt a single word. Ever. Not one.
Steve, tell you what. You go find a SINGLE SCOTUS ruling based on the signature line in the constitution and you’ll have an argument. Surely if it’s important, then in 225 years SOME SCOTUS Justice would have referred to it in law. Go ahead…tell us where it’s at. Otherwise you’re an idiot
bob: If “in the Year of our Lord” is not meaningful to you, as present in the Constitution of the United States, why is the monument of two intersecting I-beams at the WTC site meaningful to you? A rhetorical question I assure you. By the way, I learned today that BOB is an acronym for bug-out bag.
SteveP I noticed you dodged the issue. No surprise there since you have no argument. And “in the year of our lord” is boilerplate. A cross on public property is a violation of the Constitution. I realize you hate America but I don’t. I’m not a Wahabi Christian like you. Although I’m not Catholic I, unlike you, defend it.
Ummmmmm….Bob (MK..uh Jesus never wrote a word. NOt a single word. Ever. Not one.) Did I say that He did?
SteveP,
Big
Old
Blowhard
Bordering
On
Buffoon
Bratty
Overbearing
Boy
Better
Off
Bowing Out
Big
Officious
bully
bob: the issue is you hate intersecting lines. If you have your way all building codes will need to be changed to force building with only parallel beams. No intersections permitted! Graph paper? Outlawed! Roads will need to be re-routed to avoid intersections: junctions only! The only good thing is you’ll not be able to cross your fingers and tell a lie – felony! Get some sleep. You’ll be less cross-eyed in the morning.
mk: bob does seem to have a great deal to be angry about. I started teasing him on another thread after he got to puffing and blowing. I should probably not tease him (or her) . . .
SteveP,
I have refrained from teasing him up to this point, but even I have only so much patience. Dude takes himself waaaaaay too seriously. Okay. I’m done teasing him. For now. Have a good night. God be with you.
mk: And also with you. Lord, deliver consolation to bob. We ask this through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, forever and ever.
Hey Maggie, I am a Tea Party member too…one of the founding members of our county’s group. I grew up in another state and city….where I was steeped in love of American history. George Washington wrote a letter to the Jewish congregation in my home town in August of 1790 which contained his most prominent pronouncement on religious toleration. It is too bad bob doesn’t get it. Oh, well. Let us pray for him and one another.
Gee Mary the Tea Party has only 1 goal: destroy America to protect the rich. As to toleration, you wish the destruction of the Catholic church. A tragedy since most tea partiers are historically illiterate
Steve, thanks for stopping teasing me. I was beside myself with grief, in despair at your jibes. You have a rapier like wit unparalled in your ability to make streams of jokes about people’s names.
Bob,
Oh Bob! It’s not that SteveP is all that clever…it’s that you make it so easy!
Hey bob, how would you know what the Tea Pary stands for or what it’s goals are. You obviously are not a member. Yup, the Catholic Church and Christians are not the only thing about which you are “invincibly ignorant”. I will continue to keep you and all like you in my prayers.
Mary you guys are proud of your hatred of America and your love of the rich. It’s all you believe in.
@bob ok let’s talk some facts.
According to the US census site on population, self-described religious identification 2008. 228,182,000 said they were Christian of which 173,402,000 are Catholic. 8,796,000 were other religions of which 2,680 were Jewish and 1,349,000 were Muslim. 34,169,000 said no religion of which 1,621,000 were atheist. And 11,815,000 refused to answer. So Catholics are not the minority you keep throw at us and we do NOT need you to defend us.
We are a country governed by the people. You keep blabbering something about some Christian form of Government, we have no idea of what you are talking about. What we are stating is that we are Americans and as Americans we are part of the conversation. We will not be pushed to the side just because you don’t like us or that you do not believe in our religion. You my friend are the minority. While you have the right to speak up, you do not have the right to impose your believes on us. You are saying the 83.75% of the population is insane because we believe God and that the .005% that believe as you do are the only sane ones around. I think not.
As for the cross. Those building are what I call a cookie cutter design. The structure of each floor is the same. Each uses the same parts. That keeps the cost down. So they should have found hundreds if not thousands of structural pieces that looked like the one we found. But they didn’t, not only did they just find one but they found it standing in an upright position. I think the odds of finding this are astronomical! In all the building collapses throughout the world, I’ve never heard of such a thing. As Christians, we are the only ones who can interpret what it means, after all, we are the ones who instantly recognized it. While you are free to disagree with our interpretation, you are not free to use the courts to exclude us from the conversation. After all, when we get it to the Supreme Court… they have been ruling in OUR FAVOR lately.
I read the other day that they were lowering a fire truck into the memorial so they could close up the roof. I’m thinking it’s a good thing you’re not a policeman. Because then you would be saying they can’t have a fire truck because they don’t have a police car, ambulance or other vehicles that were destroyed.
@bob Let’s us also remember, we did not put that cross there. Like it or not, it is a part of what happen. That’s a Historical Fact. So let’s not change history just because you don’t understand what some people are saying about it. Understanding takes time and study, I hope we all have the time we need to undertake the study.
Perhaps, they should have an area of the memorial that’s tells the story of all the countries and religions who lost loved ones that day. It should not be a part of the cross exhibit, because like the Holocaust Memorial is for the Jewish people, the Christian people need a place for their sorrow and healing. But there should be an exhibit emphasizing how this was a global horror, crossing all country and religious bounds. It was a crazy minority, that decided they had the right to force their view and their ways upon us. This event should be showing us how important it is to come together, despite our differences. Instead we once again have a minority shouting, ‘my way or the highway’. A minority that is insisting on their way, to heck with those who they are hurting. Well bob, this time, we’re just saying ‘NO’, Enough, we have listened to your rants and have found them lacking. This time it’s important and we are Demanding our Rights to be a part of this conversation and this memorial.
@bob And now let’s look at the Amendments to the Constitution of the United States of America. “Amendment I. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof: or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
So bob, this is a Memorial of a historical event that we all know about. This building has nothing to do with running the country and there is no ‘law’ being made, so there is no ‘establishment’ case. But your demands Violate Our free exercise of our religion AND our Right of freedom of speech -which our Constitution Does guarantee us.
So, in closing, This is a Catholic blog, making you our guest. You had your say, We listened. You didn’t want a conversation, you only wanted to disparage us based solely on our Religion. That is called discrimination and is boarding on a hate crime. So, I shake the dust of you from my feet and move on.
JohnY this is an establishment of religion. It’s in a govt funded place. It does not matter that ‘no law is being made’ (whatever that means). So it is, by definition, an establishment. No you are not the govt. Sorry. And I notice you guys ignore the fact that an establishment of religion would destroy your Catholic church. You just can’t handle the truth!
JohnY you seem to think minorities don’t have rights! YOU ARE A MINORITY!! Read those words, John. YOU ARE A MINORITY. You are a Catholic. You’re about 26% of the US population. So go ahead tell us about how you want minority rights destroyed! You’re not smart enough to realize you’re committing suicide!
JohnY yes, I DO have the right to force my views on you! That’s what the LAW is all about. MINORITIES HAVE RIGHTS. You’re not too bright so don’t know the history of Catholic/Protestant relationships in this country. The BURNING OF CONVENTS in Philadelphia. The characterization of Adlai Stevenson as favoring “rum, Romanism and rebellion”...the fact that TODAY many people think of the Pope as the antiChrist. I suggest you go read history before you shoot off your bazoo about your revisionist and FALSE view of “Christian” history in the US. YOU may think of yourself as “Christian” but MILLIONS of Protestants think you’re a HERETIC. YOU ARE A MINORITY regardless of whether you like it or not!
Mary, your question is risible! You think you have to be a member of a party to know what it stands for? How many Popes were communist? They had a pretty good idea of what the Communist Party stood for even though they WEREN’T communist! Where do you GET these ideas?
@Mary. Glad to read you are a prime Tea Partier and enjoy your posts. Thank
@JohnY. Great research and responses.
@bob. I owe you an apology. In my pride I accused you of Invincible Ignorance without explaining it. Ignorance is not stupidity; it is lack of knowledge on a subject, as I am ignorant of calculus and Sanskrit. Here is a link that explains that term:http://www.americancatholictruthsociety.com/articles/invincible.htm. I hope you are open-minded enough to read it. If not you soon may be as you have now exposed yourself to a great deal of prayer for your enlightenment and grace to receive the gift of faith. It does not matter what you respond in answer. You will still be prayed for and if you need to find out what it is “to fight God” as a member of the Sandhedrin once said, well, that is in His hands. God bless and keep you.
I am sorry for giving you a bad impression of Christianity by my pride and some anger and certainly repent of and will not repeat it.
@JohnY. I am grateful for your stats post and am filing it away to keep. Bless you.
Bob said: “How many Popes were communist? They had a pretty good idea of what the Communist Party stood for even though they WEREN’T communist!”
The popes who knew about communism the best suffered under it and their experiences and the experiences of all who suffered under it (or were part of it and renounced it ultimately ...have you ever heard of Louis Budenz?)are the true sources of information. But you obviously have neither first hand experience as a Tea Party Member nor exposure to those who have been part of this very American grass roots movement. As an active Tea Party member I assure you my experience informs me that everything you claim it to be is patently false. Where do you GET these ideas?
JohnY and Maggie: thank you for your posts. Let us continue to pray for one another.
Mary again and again you embarrass yourself with your pride in your ignorance. You first state you have to be a party member to know what a party believes. NOW you contradict your own argument! Who was it that said ‘never argue with an opponent when he’s destroying his own argument’.
Carry on!
Poor bob. As my kids would say, you have “issues”. I am praying for you and have added you to our family log book of intentions to pray for. May God bless you and keep you in the palm of His hand.
The Lord be with you, Mary. :-)
@bob: Why do you keep trying to force us to believe that atheism is a religion, when atheism is only a belief? Religion is man’s response to God’s Gift of Faith. Atheism is a belief held by some but may not be confused with the worship of God. The cross at the WTC is the free speech of those who have perished there. Government does not give life and government cannot endow our unalienable rights. Only Our CREATOR endows our unalienble rights. Any atheist who rejects our unalienable, endowed rights, forfeits his own citizenship and commits perjury in a court of law. Each and every citizen owns all public property in joint and common tenancy and our constitution must apply. Every public square without a cross is a tribute to atheism which is not the same as man’s response to God’s Gift of Faith, but a belief such as the world is flat or there are cosmic space ships circling the earth, or there is no God Who endows the sovereign person with UNALIENABLE RIGHTS.
Mary, you’re right. I have issues. I saw what religious fanatics did on 9/11. And I see what you want to do NOW to our Constitution. Issues? You bet. It’s called ‘patriotism’. I’m PROUD of my issues, as you are of your robust ignorance
Mary Devoe since I never said atheism WAS a religion, you’re arguing against a strawman. The cross is NOTHING of the kind as you suggest. Atheists, Jews, Muslims, Buddhist and Christians died there. What arrogance you have! There is no creator mentioned in our Constitution. None. Too bad for you! And your paranoia about perjury is a delusion. If you think you’re right, tell you what. You go find a SINGLE ATHEIST…even ONE who’s been sent to jail, OK? Otherwise you’re just another idiot. Absence of a cross is not a sign of atheism. It’s a sign of SECULAR GOVERNMENT. No Muslim considers the cross sacred. Nor does a Jew, a Buddhist, a Hindu, etc. You would forceably convert ALL non Christians to your beliefs. Jefferson knew about your stupidity.
@bob: Speaking of idiots, WHO made you? Who created you as a sovereign person who constitutes our government and WHO brought you into existence? If you do not know or choose not to answer, please do not post here anymore as your posts are offensive.
1. In CONGRESS,
SATURDAY, March 16, 1776.
–do earnestly recommend, that FRIDAY, the seventeenth day of May next, be observed by the said Colonies as a day of HUMILIATION, FASTING, and PRAYER; that we may with united hearts confess and bewail our manifold sins and transgressions, and by a sincere, repentance and amendment of life, appease his righteous displeasure and through the merits and mediation of Jesus Christ, obtain his pardon and forgiveness; humbly imploring his assistance to frustrate the cruel purposes of our unnatural enemies; and by inclining their hearts to justice and benevolence, prevent the further effusion of kindred blood. …and grant that a spirit of incorruptible Patriotism and of pure undefiled Religion may universally prevail; and this Continent be speedily restored to the blessings of Peace and Liberty, and enabled to transmit them inviolate to the latest Posterity. And it is recommended to Christians of all denominations to assemble for Public Worship, and abstain from servile Labour on the said Day.
By Order of Congress,
JOHN HANCOCK, President
1. PROCLAMATION.
MARCH 20, 1797.
[Independent Chronicle, March 30, 1797; the text is in W. V. Wells, Life of Samuel Adams, vol. iii., pp. 365, 366.]
By Authority. Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
BY THE GOVERNOR,
A PROCLAMATION FOR A DAY OF SOLEMN FASTING AND PRAYER.
And as it is our duty to extend our wishes to the happiness of the great Family of Man, I concede we cannot better express ourselves than by humbly supplicating the Supreme Ruler of the World–That the rod of tyrants may be broken into pieces, and the oppressed made Free–That wars may cease in all the Earth, and that the confusions that are and have been among the Nations may be overruled for the promoting and speedily bringing on that holy and happy period, when the Kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ may be everywhere established, and all the people willingly bow to the Sceptre of Him who is the Prince of Peace.
And I do hereby recommend that all unnecessary labour and recreation may be suspended on the said day.
Given at the Council Chamber in Boston, this 20th day of March, in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Ninety seven, and in the twenty first Year of the Independence of the United States of America.
SAMUEL ADAMS.
Attest, JOHN AVERY, Secretary.
GOD SAVE THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS!
I think Mother Angelica would be absolutely horrified at the tone and language used by some on this blog since EWTN acquired the National Catholic Register. What an absolute disgrace!
Atheism is no religion. Atheism is only a belief. The Supreme Court in Engel v. Vitale tried atheism under the penumbra of religion, so atheism must be treated as religion. Religion is man’s response to God’s Gift of Faith. Atheism is a belief held by some but may not be confused with the worship of God. The cross at the WTC is the free speech of those who have perished there. Government does not give life and government cannot endow our unalienable rights. Only Our CREATOR endows our unalienable rights. Any atheist who rejects our unalienable, endowed rights, forfeits his own citizenship and commits perjury in a court of law. Atheism is a belief such as the world is flat or there are cosmic space ships circling the earth, or there is no God Who endows the sovereign person with UNALIENABLE RIGHTS. Spread atheism around and man becomes the property of the state.
Mary Devoe, you made a claim about atheism being judged a religion. I checked the Findlaw case summary about Engel v Vitale and do not find that. Where is your citation or reference? Here’s the Findlaw summary:
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=370&invol=421
The cross at the WTC is not free speech since the govt does not HAVE free speech. PEOPLE have free speech. The govt is censored regarding religion. And your characterization of atheism vs. religion is useless since it’s wrong. There never, in the entire history of the human race, has been a free religious govt. Not one. Again and again you dodge the FACT that a state religion in the US would destroy the minority Catholic church
I’m a theist. Atheists don’t bother me because the God atheists don’t believe in is the God I don’t believe in either.
@bob said: “I’ll go with the Constitution.” Preamble
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. From WHOM does “our Posterity” come?
In the final analysis, “separation of church and state” is an intimate and personal choice made between man and his conscience. Since the state is mortal and finite and will end, the immortal, eternal soul of man triumphs every time.
Why do you, bob, have to deny and refuse to acknowledge the sovereign personhood of all of our Creator’s (The Declaration of Independence) children? Please explain to me WHO gives you existence? The devil has no soul, no posterity, no destiny, no nothing, but you do.
@ bob on Monday, Aug 1, 2011 10:12 AM (EDT):Mary Devoe, you made a claim about atheism being judged a religion. I checked the Findlaw case summary about Engel v Vitale and do not find that. Where is your citation or reference?
The Supreme Court of the United States of America tried atheism and the atheist Madalyn Murray O’Hairs’ case to ban prayer in public school under the penumbra (umbrella) of Freedom of Religon, treating atheism as religion, the worship of God, man’s respnse to God’s gift of Faith. The verdict was that “she can go her own way” and so can we. It IS called FREEDOM.
@Mary and JohnY Keep praying. It is like holy water on the devil.
Mary DeVoe, as I said, I checked the case summary on “Findlaw”. YOUR reference. I didn’t see that it said what you said. Can you please provide a citation? Because so far you got bupkis.
Mary DeVoe, posterity comes from one’s loins. It is our descendents. It’s not necessary for me to explain anything about god at all. It’s necessary for you, the affirmative side, to explain YOUR views. And so far all you’ve done is cited non-existent case law.
@bob “posterity comes from one’s loins. It is our descendents. It’s not necessary for me to explain anything about god at all.”
From WHOM do you get your loins? Stephen Hawkins said that he comes from the laws of gravity. That means that he must be a law of gravity and you say that you must be somebody’s loins. OK. so, now what???We got one law of gravity and one loin. But really bob, from Whom did you get your sovereign personhood to become a citizen, and one of our posterity, your rational nature, your intellect, your abilty to write music, your ability to contemplate the transcendent, your conscience to judge good from evil, all of which are non physical, but abstract qualities of which animals in their innocence do not enjoy? You have used your exceptional judgement to whack everybody who disagrees with you without thanking our Creator for your blessings, which makes you an ingrate of the highest order. To send your immortal soul into eternity holding all persons in contempt is a lot of hard labor with no accomplishment.
@ bob on Monday, Aug 1, 2011 10:12 AM (EDT):Mary Devoe, you made a claim about atheism being judged a religion. I checked the Findlaw case summary about Engel v Vitale and do not find that. Where is your citation or reference?
Have you ever heard of precedent? When the Supreme Court of the United States of America tries atheism under the penumbra of Freedom of Religion it may be called “religion”. Where do you think the atheists got the idea to call atheism a “religion” to demand “equality” and “civil rights”,from the laws of gravity or maybe from your loins?
@bob: Please explain to me WHO gives you existence, eternal existence in heaven or hell?
Mary DeVoe….few questions in human history are more worthless than the one you asked.
Mary DeVoe…you keep saying the SCOTUS ruled atheism is a religion. You referenced a case. I looked at the case YOU referenced and it doesn’t say what you said it said. So why not try citing an actual reference instead of regurgitating right wing talk radio!
Vote on this issue at http://churchofatheism.webs.com
Vote on the 9/11 cross at http://churchofatheism.webs.com
Was it historical? Will it be presented appropriately? If the cross was historically significant and relevant before it became an object of politics, then the artifact should be displayed no matter if it happens to be religious. Not all religious artifacts are relevant to the history of the 9/11 site, so not all religious symbols need to be included. Not all religious symbols that are relevant are equal in historical significance or relevance. Similarly, a public school could teach about religions as long as they are not promoting religions, and a class on American religious history should not pay as much attention to Scientology as it does Christianity. Some Jews and atheists (and possibly many members of many other religious groups) feel that the manner in which this cross will be displayed, or the mere fact of it being displayed, will promote Christianity and/or give the appearance that this was a Christian tragedy, thus undermining the fact that approximately 500 Jews and 500 non-religious people died in the 9/11 tragedy. People should be sensitive to this perception. But, I do think that the cross has a secular value and I don’t think that the primary intent of the cross was to turn an American tragedy into a Christian one.
Some Christians say we should put the issue to a vote. Certainly this would work in the favor of the most popular version of Christianity. But, is it constitutional? No. The 1st Amendment was meant to protect unpopular views and religious minorities. It was not meant to protect a government endorsed religion of the populous. If one were to want to “put it to a vote,” they’d have to vote on changing the constitution. As it stands now, it would not be constitutional to reduce possible establishment clause violations to a popularity contest.
Some have tried to claim that the cross is not a religious symbol. I want to make it clear why this claim is incorrect, and why it is dishonest to say that the t-beam is “just” a t-beam. It is true that symbols mean different things to different people. One person might see the 9/11 cross as a symbol of unity and whatever other argument they can pull out of their rear to get around the law, for example, and another might see it as a symbol of the governments preference for Christianity. Some might see an upside down cross as an f-you to religion, and, amazingly, some see it as a respectful way to honor Jesus, as is the case with the cross of St. Peter. Whether or not this 9/11 cross is or is not a religious symbol comes down to what a reasonable person would view it as. A reasonable person would have to admit that it has been turned into a Christian religious icon through the religious blessing, religious naming, and the religious touring it has had across the United States from a variety of Christian groups to another. It is dishonest to say that it has not become a religious icon, in much the same way it would be dishonest to spray paint a swastika on a Jewish person’s home and then claim that it was merely a Jain symbol. The religious context and history is everything. No reasonable person would argue that any of the many t-shaped beams are inherently religious symbols. (However, the 9/11 defendants did originally claim that cross was not a religious symbol. I think this was a fairly obvious lie.)
What I do think should not make it into the memorial are religious objects that have no historical significance such as Bibles fused to rubble or prayer shawls donated by family members. The historical value is simply not there. They are merely nods to various religious communities. It is no more relevant to the history of the 9/11 memorial that such and such members were Jews, Christians, or Scientologists as it is that such and such members were Caucasian. A Bible being fused to rubble is no more historically significant than a Webster’s Dictionary being fused to rubble.
However, what I think will happen is that the Museum will throw in a couple token Jewish symbols and then declare that the Museum is inclusive and, therefore, the cross is constitutional. It’s absurd, but that is often how establishment clause issues like these are resolved; throw in a Chanukah song, put up an image of a dreidel, or throw in a Jewish prayer shawl and *poof* somehow it’s no longer showing preference for Christianity. You can also expect to see Christians fain persecution in order to prove to themselves that they are the True Christians ™ spoken of in Mathew 24:9 (see: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Christian Persecution Paradox ).
Most of the supporters of the cross will be people arguing that “this is a Christian nation” and that “atheists are trying to remove God from America” and other sorts of nonsense. To be clear, nobody would care if this Christian icon was on private land and using private money. People are bothered because it is on public land and will be using public money. Nobody is trying to restrict the speech of private citizens. People are only trying to prevent the government from showing preference for one religion (or ‘one religious tradition’ as the token Jew examples seem to show) over other religions and non-religion. I, who am an atheist, think this cross should be in the museum as a historical religious artifact, but I’m not going to toss in my hat with atheist hating Christians.
“Say unceasingly the Chaplet that I have taught you. Whoever will recite it will receive great mercy at the hour of death. Priests will recommend it to sinners as their last hope of salvation.”
“Tell My priests that hardened sinners will repent on hearing their words, when they speak about My unfathomable mercy, about the compassion I have for them in My Heart. To priests who will proclaim and extol My mercy, I will give wondrous power, and I will anoint their words and touch the hearts of those to whom they will speak.”
“I desire that priests proclaim this great mercy of Mine toward souls of sinners. Let the sinner not be afraid to approach Me. The flames of mercy are burning Me—clamoring to be spent. I want to pour them out upon these souls.”
—Jesus Christ in a Vision to St. Faustina (Circa 1930, Divine Mercy in My Soul)
http://thedivinemercy.org/message/devotions/chaplet.php
Why does God give AIDS to babies?
Posted by bob on Wednesday, Jul 27, 2011 8:28 AM (EDT):Mary De VOe…well…your view is EXACTLY why we HAVE a Constitution prohibiting establishment of religion. Your paranoid hatred of non believers caused so many problems in history the Founding Fathers knew religion was too powerful a belief to be let loose in govt. ” ARE YOU READY TO EXPLAIN WHY YOU PRACTICE MEDICINE WITHOUT A LICENSE?
Posted by bob on Wednesday, Jul 27, 2011 9:11 AM (EDT):” the public square should be a place where all religions are treated equally and none given special preference.” Only the truth has freedom of religion. The pubic square belongs to each and every citizen in joint and common tenancy.
WHY SOME MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL AND SOME MEN ARE ABORTED
The question to be asked is: Why did not the Supreme Court for the United States of America in Roe v Wade know that all men are created equal and endowed with the unalienable right to Life? Unless these individuals already had an agenda and were prejudiced against “our (constitutional) posterity”, they ought to have known. Another question to be asked of the Supreme Court for the United States of America is: If “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal”, not born equal, where does that leave them; “WE”, the atheists, ”WE”, the abortionists, “WE”, the traitors, “WE”, the perjurers? I personally believe that these individuals are not United States citizens, having repudiated our Founding Fathers’ principles, but “I cannot impose my morality one anyone” not even those whose unalienable civil rights to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness is denied to them by others’ rejection of The Declaration of Independence and of “our Creator”. When they impose their unmitigated immorality and confiscate everything you own for their evil agenda, then you and I will have to deal with it. Right now, “WE” have our life, …not like those who are aborted.
Johnathan Swift of “Gulliver’s Travels” fame wrote: and I paraphrase him, ”Babies are best eaten before they are two years old, after which they become tough.”
@bob, Your rudeness tells more about you than you might like, in fact, the emporer is naked.
@Brian: God does not give AIDS to babies. The devil does and the devils helpers do. The government tells people that condoms will prevent aids. The virus passes between the molecules of the material; all viruses, Herpes, AIDS, Papiloma. The government knows this and has for decades, still the government promotes the use of condoms in the prevention of aids. Every person who dies of aids has his government ot blame.
@bob: You still are avoiding answering my question: “From Whom do you get your existence, your intelllect, especially your free will, your ability to reason and to believe?”
Jesus Christ said: “Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and unto God what is God’s” The human being is composed of body and soul, that part of man who reasons and exercises free will is part of his soul. The body belongs to Caesar and is secular and the immortal soul belongs to God in prayer and worship. Hitlerian tirades and insults and unkindness mark your comments and so I say it is good you spell bob with SMALL letters, as there is nothing capital about you. And your existence needs to be explained.
Don’t answer Bob or any of his many aliases - his only function on this blog is to spew his hate. His only interest is in posting inflammatory comments.
“the devil and his helpers” ...are u delusional? By admitting that there is a devil u are essentially admitting that god is not all powerful. When I was 14 I realized that if there is a god then there can be no devil. Now that I’m a free thinking agnostic I realize that no one will ever know. YOU don’t know and I don’t know, and YOU don’t possess powers that I do not possess. Therefore, you cannot say that YOU KNOW. And don’t quote scriptures when you are trying to make rational points. It makes u sound stupid. The bible is like any other holy book—it is, for the most part, a guide to life—just like the qur’an or Torah or chicken soup for the soul (which I’m sure u adore). It is not to be taken literally. It is full of parables and analogies as a guide to living.
I am a veteran of this war (Khyber Pass, Kabul, and Kandahar-Afghanistan Dec 02-Nov 03) and a professor of English and theology at a highly recognized university in the northeast part of this country, and if there is one thing that I have realized, it is that when it comes to religion in this world no one is right and no one is wrong. But if there is a god then he is either dead, or extremely pissed off at himself for ever coming up with ideas like rape, murder, war, torture, disease, cancer, hate, greed, and prejudice.
The next time u say “god bless America”—think about it. What are u actually asking your “God” to do?
“When I do good, I feel good. When I do bad, I feel bad. That is my religion.”
-Abraham Lincoln
I am shaking my head here as I try to imagine living as if everything somebody else did was a personal affront to me. It sounds like a good way to worry oneself to a premature death.
You should have seen the social networking function on the Weather Channel online the eve of Irene’s landfall. Many people offering spontaneous gestures of goodwill (a.k.a. prayers), and a handful of atheists with a gigantic chip on the shoulder who had no idea how to accept the kindness of strangers graciously and were very keen on bludgeoning these bewildered people with a philosophical axe (hey bob, relax, it’s a metaphor!).
As far as speculation goes. Would I care if there was an atheist symbol put up? Probably not. Are they obligated to? Not by me. As long as you’re not into revisionist history (which I do have a problem with), and your gestures are ones of goodwill and not the other, who am I to be a jackass about it.
3fc1f2e1ae1334d13
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.