I just don't understand

And there you have it, Ladies and Gentlemen...a FREE analysis from our resident psychologists!

Bank on it. 

You can.  Thank your for your support.

____________

Because I believe it is about "look at me, look at my grief". 

My "kickback" is in the mail, I suppose?

Good lord, I will be so glad when the time comes that quantum computing devices strapped to the head will replace the need for day to day thinking on the part of you people.

Parsing of thoughts based on history, current events and attitudes of the deserving by the quantum computer will replace renegade thinking of screwballs.

For a close second place in the tacky memorial category, I nominate those auto decals that begin with "In Loving Memory of," followed by the name of some deceased who is probably totally unknown to 99+% of the drivers who view these treacly displays.

I’m going to venture the guess that you are all claiming to be republicans due to your being against everything and not having a clue as to why.

I'm an atheist and while I am on record here for supporting the atheist group in their law suit, I withdraw my support and agree 100% with you.  There is more to this story that some have led me to believe and I believe it is much adeu about nothing.  

But, TMT, you are treading close to the "no true Scotsman" fallacy.  While you claim that a "true" Christian would not utter these hateful comments, those hateful Christians would call you a wuss for not defending your God.  Like it or not, even you gentle Christians give cover to these hateful people.  

Dumb analogy and completely ignores the central issue of the WTC cross thing.  The assertion is the GOVERNMENT FUNDING of the museum and property makes this a church/state separation issue.

I no longer believe that to be the case and have come to reluctantly support the WTC cross as a historical icon.  But roadside crosses are a form of free speech by citizens.  They shouldn't litter our public right of ways but they are NOT church state violations. 

Unob, how did they get it "classified" as a historical piece, and what about the ones that had family members killed there and don't want the cross?

Jen,

This article was the catalyst of my change in heart. There is simply much more to the story than most of us know from the short headlines.  Written by an atheist:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...gIQAgvATnI_blog.html  

An article at AL.com states they're rejecting all the ideas given to honor the atheists. OK, so they can object to those but atheists can't object to the cross? I'm missing something.

Thanks for the link. I now see it in a different perspective.

Well, that's a bit tricky from a Constitutional standpoint.  And I will admit that I'm teetering a little on this.  These matters are complicated.

This cross-shaped hunk of iron was, in fact, a bit of history.  It was widely featured on magazines and newspapers.  So from a historical standpoint, the hunk of iron should go in the museum AS LONG AS it is not a prominent religious exhibit that is a centerpiece of the museum. Or if it is prominent, they better not call it the cross of Jesus or "a symbol of home for all Americans."  They could get by with a plaque that reads, "This oddly shaped intersection of metal gave solace to some Americans during the tragedy."

It is my understanding that it will stand along side other bits of junk and debris and other artifacts that are a part of our collective memory of the religiously-inspired killing of thousands of people. 

If the museum held this piece as "an example of God's love for the American people" or some sort of divinely inspired miracle, then it would certainly cross the boundaries. But they SAY that will not be the case. It's much adieu about nothing, really.
 

I'm with you there.  These people want to make a memorial out of their car?  Every time I see one, I say to myself "oh, look, the Billy Bob Memorial Silverado".

___________

Me too maggie, then we both might show some semblance of sanity.

That's exactly the point I was making, the cross is part of the history of the event. It holds significance to those that were there and directly affected. It's not an attempt to evangelize.

However, since I'm not an atheist, I guess that makes me wrong by default. No consideration needed.

I'm glad we finally found something we agree on. You stated your point well. Might want to work on your objectivity though.

Now that they're getting their cross will they still be chomping at the bits to nail atheists to the cross?

I think you should read my original post again.  I never claimed that the people making the death threats shouldn't be considered Christians.  Obviously they're Christians or they wouldn't feel so strongly about a crucifix at ground zero.  My comment was that I considered their behavior un-Christian because of the sheer hatred on display when hate is the exact opposite of what Jesus preached, and that I really couldn't understand that hatred based on my experience in the church I grew up in.

Also, I disagree that I'm giving cover to these lunatics.  If that was my purpose then why would I even bring attention to them on this forum?  I'm not trying to smear Christianity or people of faith, either, as easy as it is to do with a case like this.  I've seen firsthand the comfort and the joy that faith can bring to people, and I respect their beliefs.  I'm merely pointing out that for many Christians, their religion seems to be less about personal faith and, you know, the things that Jesus actually taught, and more about cultural warfare against anyone who doesn't identify with them.  How else can one explain 8,000 death threats toward an atheist who isn't threatening them or their faith in any way?

What the heck does that mean?

I'm an atheist who is now defending the cross.  I came to the conclusion after careful "objective" thinking.  Im simply did not have all the facts earlier and had no way to know I didn't have all the facts.  When the news first came out, this cross was to be a centerpiece fixture in the museum and people saying there would be a plaque that described it as a Christian cross that brought comfort to Americans.  If that were the case, I would reverse my stance again based on OBJECTIVE reasoning.

The fact is that there are plenty of gray areas on this and similar issues,  There will also be pictures or areas for memorials that reference other religions.  All cool by me - as long as no one religion is held over the other.  

The moment some fundy group "takes a stand" and demands that this hunk of metal be given a plaque the serves to place their particular religion in prominence, I'll send a check to the American Atheists to hep them defeat the idiots.

Believe it or not, Atheists are your staunchest ally in defending your constitutional right to worship as you please.  

 

They and I would argue that your tolerance is not 100% based on the scriptures.  God Himself commanded that his children "hate" others so much that their entire village was destroyed and all the young virgins kidnapped and raped and enslaved to the conquerors.

Jesus commanded "Don’t imagine that I came to bring peace on earth! No, rather a sword! If you love your father, mother, sister, brother, more than me, you are not worthy of being mine.“

Jesus also commands in Matthew 10:21, “Brother shall deliver up the brother to death, and the father the child: and the children shall rise up against their parents, and cause them to be put to death."

And in Luke 12 somewhere Jesus okays beating slaves.

Hatred and death to those that believe different from you is a central tenet of most religions including Christianity and Islam.   These people threatening atheists with death are just as Christian as you, sir. 

Unob, you're taking things out of context again. Here are the verses surrounding those you quoted, that show what Jesus was REALLY talking about:

 16 “I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves. 17 Be on your guard; you will be handed over to the local councils and be flogged in the synagogues. 18 On my account you will be brought before governors and kings as witnesses to them and to the Gentiles. 19 But when they arrest you, do not worry about what to say or how to say it. At that time you will be given what to say, 20 for it will not be you speaking, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you.

   21 “Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child; children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. 22 You will be hated by everyone because of me, but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved. 23 When you are persecuted in one place, flee to another. Truly I tell you, you will not finish going through the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes.

   24 “The student is not above the teacher, nor a servant above his master. 25 It is enough for students to be like their teachers, and servants like their masters. If the head of the house has been called Beelzebul, how much more the members of his household!

   26 “So do not be afraid of them, for there is nothing concealed that will not be disclosed, or hidden that will not be made known. 27 What I tell you in the dark, speak in the daylight; what is whispered in your ear, proclaim from the roofs. 28 Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell. 29 Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground outside your Father’s care.[b] 30 And even the very hairs of your head are all numbered. 31 So don’t be afraid; you are worth more than many sparrows.

   32 “Whoever acknowledges me before others, I will also acknowledge before my Father in heaven. 33 But whoever disowns me before others, I will disown before my Father in heaven.

   34 “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35 For I have come to turn

   “‘a man against his father,
   a daughter against her mother,
a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law—
   36 a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.’[c]

   37 “Anyone who loves their father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. 38 Whoever does not take up their cross and follow me is not worthy of me. 39 Whoever finds their life will lose it, and whoever loses their life for my sake will find it.

So you see, Jesus was talking about how persecuted his diciples would be for proclaiming the Truth about Jesus. When Jesus said that we should "hate our mother and father", he was telling us that we should put HIM first, above even our loved ones. Pretty simple, huh? And I find it hard to believe you don't know that. You just keep pulling random verses out of context to try proving that the God you don't even believe in is evil.

And here is the one from Luke 12 about "beating slaves":

   35 “Be dressed ready for service and keep your lamps burning, 36 like servants waiting for their master to return from a wedding banquet, so that when he comes and knocks they can immediately open the door for him. 37 It will be good for those servants whose master finds them watching when he comes. Truly I tell you, he will dress himself to serve, will have them recline at the table and will come and wait on them. 38 It will be good for those servants whose master finds them ready, even if he comes in the middle of the night or toward daybreak. 39 But understand this: If the owner of the house had known at what hour the thief was coming, he would not have let his house be broken into. 40 You also must be ready, because the Son of Man will come at an hour when you do not expect him.”
 41 Peter asked, “Lord, are you telling this parable to us, or to everyone?”

 42 The Lord answered, “Who then is the faithful and wise manager, whom the master puts in charge of his servants to give them their food allowance at the proper time? 43 It will be good for that servant whom the master finds doing so when he returns. 44 Truly I tell you, he will put him in charge of all his possessions. 45 But suppose the servant says to himself, ‘My master is taking a long time in coming,’ and he then begins to beat the other servants, both men and women, and to eat and drink and get drunk. 46 The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of. He will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the unbelievers.

   47 “The servant who knows the master’s will and does not get ready or does not do what the master wants will be beaten with many blows. 48 But the one who does not know and does things deserving punishment will be beaten with few blows. From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked.

Oh wow! It even SAYS it is a PARABLE! That means Jesus is making an ANALOGY, comparing believers and God, to masters and servants. He is telling us to always be ready to meet Him. Do you notice that He even says that those who "know" Him and don't do His will will be punished, while those who never heard of Him will get off lightly.

But I think you knew that too. You just LOVE posting things out of context to try to mislead people into thinking the Bible says something it doesn't. When will you give up? I mean, it's one thing to hold your (lack of) belief, but to deliberately try to twist scripture that way, I mean even BILL isn't THAT bad!

Believe it or not, Atheists are your staunchest ally in defending your constitutional right to worship as you please. 

All the while criticizing and ridiculing you for doing it. Glad you agree the fight was stupid.

Ono, I took nothing out of context.  I did sum it up rather than quoting the whole book.  I really, really fail to see how you cannot see the evilness of this entire passage.  I utterly fail to see how you think the verse changes meaning when the whole thing is quoted.  Jesus asks his followers to give up their wives, daughters, sons to come follow him.  What kind of mad man would ask his children to abandon his family?

I never said it was stupid.  As I see it, the Constitutionality of this was in a gray area.  For me, it has moved into a less-gray area but still brushes against the intent of the Founders.  The situation could very easily move back into the dark area if the religionists keep pushing the issue.  

and, yes, of course I will continue to disagree with religionists on the existence of a magical sky spook.  Really people. 

Nope,.  I would not change a single word . . . Of the 1st Amendment, anyway.  Religious freedom is an extremely powerful freedom we have and it MUST be defended for the protection of the state AND of the church.  No, I do not expect you to even remotely grasp that concept.

All Biblical scholars that I have read infer the meaning to be simply love them less than Christ. The word "hate," for instance, doesn't mean detest in that sense, but to love less. Yes, we have to love God and Christ above all. That, like Matt. 19, is a hard saying and something to contemplate on a regular basis.

Ono, I took nothing out of context.  I did sum it up rather than quoting the whole book.  I really, really fail to see how you cannot see the evilness of this entire passage.  I utterly fail to see how you think the verse changes meaning when the whole thing is quoted.  Jesus asks his followers to give up their wives, daughters, sons to come follow him.  What kind of mad man would ask his children to abandon his family?

*********************************************************************************************************************

Jim Jones, David Koresh, etc etc etc.

Or burning at the stake. But! You shouldn't worry, they only want nice, tender juicy atheists...

NOT dried up old beef jerky...

D*mn! I did it again...I couldn't help myself. 

*********************************************************************************************************************

Then once again you are safe.

Thank You!  I promise I will go to therapy...before they close! 

_____________

Not really - they wanted the whole family.