If memory serves correct, wasn't there a legal challenge that resulted in the mosque being approved?
‘This cross screams Christianity’: Atheists launch lawsuit over Ground Zero cross
- Thread starter Goober
- Start date
If memory serves correct, wasn't there a legal challenge that resulted in the mosque being approved?
It wasn't next door. It wasn't even in sight. And it wasn't a mosque. It was a community centre with a chapel.
But, enough. I'm throwing tennis balls at a tank here. You're convinced, and no amount of facts will change that.
There's already an atheist memorial at the WTC site. Since there's no god, any empty space is an atheist memorial.
Should we worry about radical atheists flying jets into towers in the name of nothing anytime soon?
Because of the date of the atheist national holiday.....my suggestion wouldn't be approved.......
Deliberate affront? Right, having multi-faith dialogues is sooo offensive. It couldn't possibly have a place in a world where religion is clashing daily, near a place where it was brought to US soil :roll:
So the US allegedly is only tolerant to other religions' memorials, that still doesn't sound very tolerant or welcoming. I'm not surprised then that the atheists are as militant as they are, all things considered.
The cross is entirely in keeping with another famous inside Judas job. It's the cross of death and deception. Ya can't get more religious than that. It positively reeks of Godliness.
Reminds me of a few years ago during a Geller protest near that mosque when it turned out some black guy passing by was getting heckled by the crowd only to anounce later he was Christian.
The mosque was a a deliberate affront? Remember there was also Muslims who died there, not to mention the mosque's members spoke out categorically against terrorism. Had it been a church you would not have said a thing.
Hammer n' sickle?
Nah, there more likely to try to pass 'values charters' or start communist revolutions.
Ground Zero Cross: Court presses atheist group to explain why artifact is 'offensive'
A federal appeals court said this week that an atheist group trying to keep the so-called Ground Zero Cross out of the National September 11 Memorial Museum must better explain how displaying the artifact is “offensive” and violates members’ constitutional rights.
The 17-foot-tall, steel beam “cross” was found in the rubble of the World Trade Center twin towers in New York that fell during the Sept. 11 terror attacks.
The cross became a sort of shrine or place of comfort for first responders who often prayed there and left messages or flowers. It was moved away from the debris a few weeks later and became a tourist attraction through several years of reconstruction.
American Atheists filed the suit in 2011, which was thrown out last year by a federal judge in the Southern District of New York.
The appeals court ruling Thursday cites an amicus brief filed by the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, a nonprofit law firm that specializes in church-state law and protecting the free expression of all religious traditions.
“We’re thrilled that the court picked up on this issue,” said group lawyer Eric Baxter, whose brief argued that American Atheists had no right to bring a lawsuit in the first place. “Courts should not allow people to sue just because they claim to get ‘dyspepsia’ over a historical artifact displayed in a museum.”
The museum officially opened on May 21.
The judge has now given the plaintiffs until July 14 to file supplemental legal briefs before deciding whether the case will proceed.
Among the questions that must be answered in the new filings is how the offensiveness of the cross, which the plaintiffs view as a Christian symbol for all 9-11 victims, becomes a “constitutional injury.”
The other question is -- if the plaintiffs indeed feel displaying the cross “marginalizes them as American citizens” -- then how is that a “particular and concrete injury" compared to just “the abstract stigmatization of atheists generally.”
The judge has also asked the plaintiffs to substantiate their claim the museum and Sept. 11 memorial are getting taxpayer dollars.
“Taking personal offense is not an injury that warrants invoking the power of the courts to shut down everything you disagree with,” Baxter also said. “The Constitution is not a personal tool for censoring everyone’s beliefs but your own.”
Ground Zero Cross: Court presses atheist group to explain why artifact is 'offensive' | Fox News
where is your atheist now?
A federal appeals court said this week that an atheist group trying to keep the so-called Ground Zero Cross out of the National September 11 Memorial Museum must better explain how displaying the artifact is “offensive” and violates members’ constitutional rights.
The 17-foot-tall, steel beam “cross” was found in the rubble of the World Trade Center twin towers in New York that fell during the Sept. 11 terror attacks.
The cross became a sort of shrine or place of comfort for first responders who often prayed there and left messages or flowers. It was moved away from the debris a few weeks later and became a tourist attraction through several years of reconstruction.
American Atheists filed the suit in 2011, which was thrown out last year by a federal judge in the Southern District of New York.
The appeals court ruling Thursday cites an amicus brief filed by the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, a nonprofit law firm that specializes in church-state law and protecting the free expression of all religious traditions.
“We’re thrilled that the court picked up on this issue,” said group lawyer Eric Baxter, whose brief argued that American Atheists had no right to bring a lawsuit in the first place. “Courts should not allow people to sue just because they claim to get ‘dyspepsia’ over a historical artifact displayed in a museum.”
The museum officially opened on May 21.
The judge has now given the plaintiffs until July 14 to file supplemental legal briefs before deciding whether the case will proceed.
Among the questions that must be answered in the new filings is how the offensiveness of the cross, which the plaintiffs view as a Christian symbol for all 9-11 victims, becomes a “constitutional injury.”
The other question is -- if the plaintiffs indeed feel displaying the cross “marginalizes them as American citizens” -- then how is that a “particular and concrete injury" compared to just “the abstract stigmatization of atheists generally.”
The judge has also asked the plaintiffs to substantiate their claim the museum and Sept. 11 memorial are getting taxpayer dollars.
“Taking personal offense is not an injury that warrants invoking the power of the courts to shut down everything you disagree with,” Baxter also said. “The Constitution is not a personal tool for censoring everyone’s beliefs but your own.”
Ground Zero Cross: Court presses atheist group to explain why artifact is 'offensive' | Fox News
where is your atheist now?
This whole thing is BS and I'm not a fan of religion myself. Really, if they want to have this cross up as some sort of Christian Memorial for those who died, who cares?
Atheists are all butthurt over having religion 'forced' on them, well I'm tired of atheists and their dismissive and 'holier than thou' attitude.
Atheists are all butthurt over having religion 'forced' on them, well I'm tired of atheists and their dismissive and 'holier than thou' attitude.
Point- Did not know Atheists have a Monument to their non belief. Could the resident Atheists help a former dirt poor Dumb Down Homer (DDH for those newer members out)? Pulease..
I was thinking the same thing Goober. By all means, their monument that also survived in the smouldering ruins should be displayed!
Oh wait, they didn't have one?
I was thinking the same thing Goober. By all means, their monument that also survived in the smouldering ruins should be displayed!
Oh wait, they didn't have one?
I didn't see the steel beams as forming a Christian cross, I thought they formed Thor's hammer.
But, it is an American decision anyway. As a Canuck, I avoid religious squabbles south of the second longest defended border.
Really, it's the Pope's call.
But, it is an American decision anyway. As a Canuck, I avoid religious squabbles south of the second longest defended border.
Really, it's the Pope's call.
I object to any form of religious intolerance, including atheists that want to be intolerant of Christians. Should anyone provide a reasonable case where one religion is offended by another while practising religious tolerance, I am all ears.
Really? I love religious intolerance. It's even funnier'n crazy-a$$ nationalism.
Dear Sister; not you too!
Hey, Muuuum...
Hey, James. I thought Christians were offended by the States' tolerating Muslims?
Funny how that works, eh?
The atheist movement believing that the absence of something has equal and far reaching application to all, ergo, that (ie their belief system) must be adopted by all in the name of an egalitarian system