Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
Karlis

Atheist Group Wants WWI Memorial Cross

73 posts in this topic

A battle is brewing in Woonsocket, Rhode Island as an atheist group argues that a cross in town, which is a World War I memorial, is unconstitutional and should be moved.

Other residents of town are protesting the removal of the 91-year-old memorial.

http://dailycaller.c...memorial-cross/

Considering that, "the city is close to bankruptcy", could it be possible that the atheist group zeroed in on the town for that reason? Also, since this is a war memorial that has been there for 91 years, why should it be attacked?

Comments anyone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A battle is brewing in Woonsocket, Rhode Island as an atheist group argues that a cross in town, which is a World War I memorial, is unconstitutional and should be moved.

Other residents of town are protesting the removal of the 91-year-old memorial.

http://dailycaller.c...memorial-cross/

Considering that, "the city is close to bankruptcy", could it be possible that the atheist group zeroed in on the town for that reason? Also, since this is a war memorial that has been there for 91 years, why should it be attacked?

Comments anyone?

I'm an atheist and I have mixed feelings over this. I don't like the idea of the religious symbols on the website but as far as the World War I Memorial Cross goes......well, I think somethings should just be "Grandfathered in" so to speak.

If this was a new memorial featuring a cross that would be a different story.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I just wonder why? What purpose other than being contrarian does it serve? Is the "concerned citizen's" psyche so fragile that seeing a cross daily is going to cause trauma? The city official's POV was accurate: if this cross must be removed then the Supreme Court building must be renovated and Arlington Cemetery closed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm an atheist and I have mixed feelings over this. I don't like the idea of the religious symbols on the website but as far as the World War I Memorial Cross goes......well, I think somethings should just be "Grandfathered in" so to speak.

If this was a new memorial featuring a cross that would be a different story.....

If the majority in the town are Christian then why should even a new memorial be challenged? Granted, the majority may well change over the years but the changes could come then, as a part of a group conscience, not due to a single concerned citizen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the majority in the town are Christian then why should even a new memorial be challenged? Granted, the majority may well change over the years but the changes could come then, as a part of a group conscience, not due to a single concerned citizen.

It's not about what the majority thinks! You can't have mob rule! Why should atheists, Muslims, or people of the Jewish faith etc. have to put up with this? Either respect all religions (and the non-religious), or respect none at all. Why should the Christians always get their way and wave their beliefs in the face of all non-Christians? Why do non-Christians not matter? More importantly, why do some Christians only think about themselves and their beliefs and damn everyone else?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now, I know that Atheism has a lot of followers among this forum, but really, isn't this just the kind of arrogance, pushing their beliefs, and their insistence that any hint of religion (i.e., of course, needless to say, Christianity) should be eradicated (even if it is ostensibly on Constitutional grounds), that they spend so much of their time complaining that Religion (i.e, of course, Christianity), does? Could Atheist groups not find some more productive use of their time than annoying people?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not about what the majority thinks! You can't have mob rule! Why should atheists, Muslims, or people of the Jewish faith etc. have to put up with this? Either respect all religions (and the non-religious), or respect none at all. Why should the Christians always get their way and wave their beliefs in the face of all non-Christians? Why do non-Christians not matter? More importantly, why do some Christians only think about themselves and their beliefs and damn everyone else?

First of all...calm down :P Next, the reason I think an Atheist's argument on this is disingenuous is that by removing all religious symbolism you are actually making the memorial a perfect example of atheism. So who is being preferred then? The new memorials probably should be completely secular because I think most Christianity is dead in the US now anyway. But the older memorials were for people who actually still treasured their faith and their hope in God. The issue is really about having conflict between groups. And the last thing any of us need is more conflict.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not about what the majority thinks! You can't have mob rule!

Isn't that how Democracy works? :unsure2:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all...calm down :P Next, the reason I think an Atheist's argument on this is disingenuous is that by removing all religious symbolism you are actually making the memorial a perfect example of atheism. So who is being preferred then? The new memorials probably should be completely secular because I think most Christianity is dead in the US now anyway. But the older memorials were for people who actually still treasured their faith and their hope in God. The issue is really about having conflict between groups. And the last thing any of us need is more conflict.

Look, I'm not one of those atheists that belongs to any group that goes around trying to remove all religious symbolism! And, how does removing all symbolism make it "a perfect example of atheism"? To me it just makes it secular.

This is all about one religion getting preferential treatment. Believe it or not, it is an insult to many that are not Christian. How would you truly feel if your loved ones (if they were Christians), were being honered with an Islamic Star and Crescent symbol? Is it really that difficult for you to see this from a non-Christian perspective?

Do you truly believe that all old memorials in the US were for Christians only, and that in the old days everybody was Christian?

And yes, the last thing this world needs is more conflict.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The memorial is nearly a hundred years old. hat they want is tantamount to putting pants on Michealangelo's David because his nudity is "offensive".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The cross is a symbol that pays tribute to the most influential teacher, rabbi and prophet of all time. I happen to be Jewish but I believe that Jesus Christ is just as deserving of remembrance as Martin Luther King or other iconic figure who has made the world a better place to live. Religious symbolism hurts no one, and for many it brings hope, joy, understanding and a sense of well-being. The atheists need to get a life, let others express their faith, and remember the first amendment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The cross is a symbol that pays tribute to the most influential teacher, rabbi and prophet of all time. I happen to be Jewish but I believe that Jesus Christ is just as deserving of remembrance as Martin Luther King or other iconic figure who has made the world a better place to live. Religious symbolism hurts no one, and for many it brings hope, joy, understanding and a sense of well-being. The atheists need to get a life, let others express their faith, and remember the first amendment.

So do the theists. After all, among those who died at the time were Jews and Muslims and, yes, atheists.

Don't getme wrong, I don't necassrily agree. However the US is edging into a theocracy at this point, which is why these fights have started brewing.

The first amendement stipulates seperation of church in state, thatthe State cannot show preferential treatment to one religion or another. A cross is an explicitly Christian symbol, which is where their case is coming from.

(As a matter of course, I pulled up a copy of the letter FFRF sent out, can be found here)

From reading the article, the fellow seems to havemissed the point. And that Arlington Cemetary has been discussed. No issues about crosses as long as the various religious members were allowed to have their religious symbol used.

I don't like the idea that the majority gets to decide on the minority, personally. It's to close to "everyone else was doing it."

Some of the worlds darkest moments happen due to this reason, and often to the "minorities."

Edited by ShadowSot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the soldiers took faith in /god, it should stay.

In any other case, they should get over it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the soldiers took faith in /god, it should stay.

In any other case, they should get over it.

Well, not quite. The issue is a real one, that the cross shows preference on Christainity over other religious beliefs. Which means this probably will get remove, fo rthe reasons addressed in the letter from the FFRF.

Even if Woonsocket could afford the legal fees it wouldn't stand up in court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

~~~ ...

Even if Woonsocket could afford the legal fees it wouldn't stand up in court.

Question is -- was this challenge to this particular site/town made by the atheist organisation because the town does not have the financial ability to defend in Court? In other words, is this an attempt to get another "easy" Court precedent, which then will be used in future Court actions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So do the theists. After all, among those who died at the time were Jews and Muslims and, yes, atheists.

Don't getme wrong, I don't necassrily agree. However the US is edging into a theocracy at this point, which is why these fights have started brewing.

The first amendement stipulates seperation of church in state, thatthe State cannot show preferential treatment to one religion or another. A cross is an explicitly Christian symbol, which is where their case is coming from.

I don't like the idea that the majority gets to decide on the minority, personally. It's to close to "everyone else was doing it."

Some of the worlds darkest moments happen due to this reason, and often to the "minorities."

Edging into a theocracy now? We're not talking about something that's being done now, we're talking about something that was done in 1921. I'm afraid that insisting that something that was done 90 years ago betaken down because some Atheists might be offended by it sounds rather than wanting to insist on a Atheocracy; that these Atheists want to force their views on everyone.

And again, isn't the idea that the majority gets to decide on the minority the idea on which Democracy is based?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However the US is edging into a theocracy at this point, which is why these fights have started brewing.

Wait what??? The US isnt even close to "edging into a theocracy". These fights havent just started. They have been going on for the better part of 60 years. With Christians losing nearly every battle. Atheists have been able to remove God outta the publics eye nearly everywhere. These memorials are christians last stand so to speak. Do you have any proof the US is edging tward a theocracy?

Do you think the US is moving tward a theocracy cause of politicions veiws on Christianity in the GOP? If so, that isnt anything new. And 99% of the time they are lieing anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And again, isn't the idea that the majority gets to decide on the minority the idea on which Democracy is based?

Pretty much. Thats why our founders never used the word democracy in any of the founding documents.. Especialy when it comes to any specific right. Freedom of religion isnt, or should never be subjected to a vote. A true democracy is among the worst way for any people to be governed. Its two wolves and a sheep voting on what is for dinner.

The powers that be slowly over many years introduced the word democracy to describe our system of government, till we bought it hook line and sinker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, no hint of theocracy.

"In God We Trust."

Bush running the war on Iraq due to his "Christian faith." Political pundits and in office politicians shouting they were spreading God's message to the Muslims.

Laws and pratices showing deference to religion, ranging from tax exempt status to removing regulations oon child care (and then we're shocked when horror stories come out from these place.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, no hint of theocracy.

"In God We Trust."

~~~ ...

"Trusting in God" goes back to the time the first settlers came to the New World, and continued for generations afterwards. Still valid today for many Americans, imo.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Trusting in God" goes back to the time the first settlers came to the New World, and continued for generations afterwards. Still valid today for many Americans, imo.

Oh yeah, that's what I was talking about totally!

No, I'm referring to the motto of the US, which was changed from "E Pluribus Unum" to "In God we Trust." Specifically to present the US as a Christian country in comparison to the communists.

Same for the pledge and "under God."

I don't support the FFRF in this, as I said earlier. I understand why, but I don't agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, no hint of theocracy.

"In God We Trust."

Bush running the war on Iraq due to his "Christian faith." Political pundits and in office politicians shouting they were spreading God's message to the Muslims.

Laws and pratices showing deference to religion, ranging from tax exempt status to removing regulations oon child care (and then we're shocked when horror stories come out from these place.)

Mmm Shadow, just cause a politcian panders to the religious right by making such comments doesnt mean he represents the Christian faith in any way. Christianity doesnt teach pre-emtive wars of agression. Bush is globalist scum. Same as 0bama. Same as Romney. None of them want a theocracy. They just kinda say things, and the dumb public goes with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mmm Shadow, just cause a politcian panders to the religious right by making such comments doesnt mean he represents the Christian faith in any way. Christianity doesnt teach pre-emtive wars of agression. Bush is globalist scum. Same as 0bama. Same as Romney. None of them want a theocracy. They just kinda say things, and the dumb public goes with it.

Christianity teaches peace?

When convenient, sure.

"I come bearing a sword, I come to set fire to the Earth. I come to set son against father. "

Yes, and no true Scotsman where's briefs under his kilt.

If politicians are using religion as a tool to fool the religious the religion is still a problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.

If politicians are using religion as a tool to fool the religious the religion is still a problem.

No stupid people are the problem. Same with folks like yourself who still fall for the left right paradigm. Who allow this establishment to keep you divided, and even make you against your fellow Americans. Instead of pointing out the real criminals. They use folks like yourself as a tool just as much as anyone.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Christianity teaches peace?

When convenient, sure.

"I come bearing a sword, I come to set fire to the Earth. I come to set son against father. "

Yes, and no true Scotsman where's briefs under his kilt.

If politicians are using religion as a tool to fool the religious the religion is still a problem.

Ever heard of metaphor or rhetoric? Anyone can find quotes anywhere to support anything they want it to say, we all know that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.