U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-04-2011, 03:48 PM
 
16,300 posts, read 24,999,446 times
Reputation: 8282

Advertisements

If they want to hold a symbol of execution in high regards, well, hang it on your wall, stick it on top of your church, perform silly ceremonies in it's presence, but keep it the hell of public property and lands.

It is also handy when you wear it on your lapel, or around your neck, and the bling'er, the better for it makes it clear that the wearer cannot be trusted to be truthful or ethical in business dealings. I remember very clearly my dad telling me "son, there's only one reason to go to church, to see who is sitting up front, for that is the business man that will try and ********* you (a term that could also mean a threaded fastener installed with a screwdriver) on Monday". About 90% of the time that has proven accurate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-04-2011, 09:27 PM
 
205 posts, read 573,100 times
Reputation: 118
Wow, I have been busy all day so I will try and respond to a few.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hueffenhardt View Post
Yes, be it known today (and I'll let my wife know as well) if I die in a car accident and people are still allowed to and are putting up crosses on the side of the road to mark the death of others, I want someone to erect a Darwin fish for me on the spot.
Can do!

Quote:
Originally Posted by QuixoticHobbit View Post
The phrases "Freedom of Religion" and "Right to Bear Arms" aren't in the Constitution, either..

The only way to ensure religious freedom and prevent the favor of any one particular religion over the others IS to have total separation of church and state. And yes, it IS spelled out in the 1st amendment. If there is any doubt, all one need do is look to the words of the FATHER of the Constitution itself, James Madison:

"Strongly guarded as is the separation between religion and & Government in the Constitution of the United States the danger of encroachment by Ecclesiastical Bodies, may be illustrated by precedents already furnished in their short history"

"The civil Government, though bereft of everything like an associated hierarchy, possesses the requisite stability, and performs its functions with complete success, whilst the number, the industry, and the morality of the priesthood, and the devotion of the people, have been manifestly increased by the total separation of the church from the State"

"Every new and successful example, therefore, of a perfect separation between the ecclesiastical and civil matters, is of importance; and I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in showing that religion and Government will both exist in greater purity the less they are mixed together "

"Having always regarded the practical distinction between Religion and Civil Government as essential to the purity of both, and as guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States, I could not have otherwise discharged my duty on the occasion which presented itself "

"We are teaching the world the great truth, that Governments do better without kings and nobles than with them. The merit will be doubled by the other lesson: that Religion flourishes in greater purity without, than with the aid of Government"

"The prevailing opinion in Europe, England not excepted, has been that religion could not be preserved without the support of government nor government be supported without an established religion that there must be at least an alliance of some sort between them. It remained for North America to bring the great and interesting subject to a fair, and finally a decisive test."


`nuff said
I was afraid this would veer in to a debate on the Constitution. As I recall, James Madison wrote those words sometime around 1815-1820, well after the Constitution was signed. The first time "Separation of Church and State" was used was I believe in 1802 as part of a letter Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptist Association. Also, well after the signing of the Constitution. If that specific phrase was so important to them you would think one of them would have put that in the Constitution.

As I stated before, they did however put an amendment to offer Freedom of Religion (or not to have a Religion) to all, which happens to be the 1st Amendment.

1st Amendment, no more, no less-

"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."

Remember back to one of the main reasons the English came here in the first place. To escape the religious persecution in England.

I already said, I agree with you in most aspects of Separation of Church and State. Let's stick what is actually in the Constituion, not a memo James Madison wrote in a magazine 30 years after the Constitution was written.

'nuff said


Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamplight View Post

What does bother me is when the government does things that assume we're all Christians. "In God We Trust" on our money is one of those things. I don't believe in God, so how could I trust him? If I'm automatically excluded in the "We", then why is on my money? From a practical standpoint it's minor, but in principal it's pretty offensive to me as an atheist.
As I said to another poster, I can agree with this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by skoro View Post
It's like this...

Among us atheists, there are a few hardcore fundamentalists.

Maybe you religious guys have a few of your own?
We certainly do. Every "group" of people does; unfortunately.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mythunderstood View Post
I don't feel that any memorial religious or otherwise should be allowed to be placed roadside, as it is a distraction and is improper. What if everyone were allowed to create a memorial at the site of a loved one's death? You would have sites anywhere and everywhere (bathrooms, at the office, at the grocery store, at the beach.....everywhere)! Memorials have their proper place (cemeteries, loved one's private homes, etc) but roadside is not one of them.
You make a good point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by busterkeaton View Post
What i'm saying is that the upside down cross represents Satanism(which I am not an adherent of) and if placed on the side of the road, would you do something to try and take it down? Or even let's say a pentagram by the side of the road marking an adherents death?

Well, I didn't even know that. I can't say I would be happy with it but as far as I am concerned, if one is acceptable, then we can't pick and choose.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Asheville Native View Post
If they want to hold a symbol of execution in high regards, well, hang it on your wall, stick it on top of your church, perform silly ceremonies in it's presence, but keep it the hell of public property and lands.

It is also handy when you wear it on your lapel, or around your neck, and the bling'er, the better for it makes it clear that the wearer cannot be trusted to be truthful or ethical in business dealings. I remember very clearly my dad telling me "son, there's only one reason to go to church, to see who is sitting up front, for that is the business man that will try and ********* you (a term that could also mean a threaded fastener installed with a screwdriver) on Monday". About 90% of the time that has proven accurate.
I can see you are a bit bitter about religion in general. It sounds to me like the Church you were brought up in probably played a role in your decision to become an Atheist, and from what you said in your post, I can see why if that kind of stuff was going on. There are people in all groups that are "in it" for nothing else than for personal gain. Unfortunately, that is the world we live in these days.


Thanks again for all the responses. Just to put this in prospective, I am a Christian and believe in God. I do not go to Church every Sunday. I have no interest in trying to "convert" anyone and I clearly understand that there many Christians out there that do not act as they should, just like every other group of people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-05-2011, 04:22 AM
 
7,802 posts, read 5,292,582 times
Reputation: 2973
Quote:
Originally Posted by nc2sc778 View Post
I have always wondered why [some] atheists have such a problem with for example, a privately paid for cross being put on a public roadside in memory of a State Trooper that was killed there.
I think very few atheists DO object to that. I certainly know a grand total of zero and I know a hell of a lot of atheists through my work locally with Atheist Ireland and Globally with Atheist Alliance International.

I think you will find their objections are mostly to do with crosses in public funded offices such as hospitals, job centers, social welfare office and more... anything where the tax payers money goes. The state and its offices should not be showing support for any one religion at all.

However if I was forced to think up secular arguments against road side crosses and was not left alone until I thought of some, I would point out that firstly the cross is a testament to the history of human sacrifice and as such is not really an appropriate symbol to be erecting publicly.

Secondly by sticking a cross in the ground you are erecting a symbol of YOUR beliefs - not those of the person who actually died or of all the people who also share in the grief/loss. You are opportunistically using the death of another to advertise your beliefs. If you want to explore the death of another person in the context of your beliefs, then erect something on your own property and do so privately and let those without your beliefs explore the death of that person their own way.

Further people can not be going around erecting what they want, where they want. If I took apart my wardrobe and wanted to be rid of the wood and did not want to pay for the disposal, should I be allowed dump it where I want and simply claim that I was erecting a symbol to my personal religious beliefs and should be left alone? No, clearly not. So you too should not be going around hammering waste wood and/or public eye sores into public areas and getting away with it solely because one can claim religious motivations. IF you hammer waste wood into the ground in public areas you should be charged with the same crimes I would be if I dumped an old wardrobe in that same spot.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2011, 12:27 AM
 
51 posts, read 64,699 times
Reputation: 74
Objecting to religious symbology would be a pretty tiring existence in my opinion, Christian or otherwise. Many religious or superstitious symbols have been adopted into many cultures in varying forms. I think the cross has become one of them: it often symbolises remebrance and in this form has gone beyond its original meaning (which was probably at least partly copied from somewhere else anyway).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2011, 08:18 AM
 
1,745 posts, read 1,887,488 times
Reputation: 943
Quote:
Originally Posted by nc2sc778 View Post
I was afraid this would veer in to a debate on the Constitution. As I recall, James Madison wrote those words sometime around 1815-1820, well after the Constitution was signed. The first time "Separation of Church and State" was used was I believe in 1802 as part of a letter Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptist Association. Also, well after the signing of the Constitution. If that specific phrase was so important to them you would think one of them would have put that in the Constitution.

*sigh*

"Freedom of Religion" and "Right to Bear arms" were also important to them yet you will not find those phrases in the Constitution either.


Quote:
As I stated before, they did however put an amendment to offer Freedom of Religion (or not to have a Religion) to all, which happens to be the 1st Amendment.

1st Amendment, no more, no less-

"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."

Remember back to one of the main reasons the English came here in the first place. To escape the religious persecution in England.
Yes, a country which did NOT have separation of church and state.

Quote:
I already said, I agree with you in most aspects of Separation of Church and State. Let's stick what is actually in the Constituion, not a memo James Madison wrote in a magazine 30 years after the Constitution was written.

'nuff said
No, not "nuff said"

It doesn't matter when Madison wrote his commentary on separation of church and state in the Constitution. The fact that he wrote them at all proves that it is in there. HE IS THE FATHER OF THE CONSTITUTION and there is no one more qualified than he to state what was intended. Both he and Thomas Jefferson made it clear that separation of church and state are outlined in the 1st amendment. And again, the simple fact is that you CANNOT have freedom of religion without such a separation. History shows that pretty clearly. It's pretty cut and dry. Anyone who argues against SOCAS is either ignorant of history & the Constitution and/or has an agenda. A theocratic agenda.

There is no other reason NOT to support separation. And interestingly, it is invariably Christians who are opposed to keeping religion (well, THEIR religion) out of government. The rest of us are happy doing so and see the necessity of it in having religious freedom and freedom in general.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2011, 09:39 AM
 
Location: WV and Eastport, ME
11,222 posts, read 11,031,967 times
Reputation: 7448
It is not enough to quote the Constitution and assume the words mean what you think they do. The Constitution means whatever the Supreme Court says it means in the most recent applicable ruling. If you don't like the way some part is currently interpreted, find a suitable case and appeal it to the Supreme Court and argue to overturn the precedence.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2011, 11:30 AM
 
705 posts, read 944,973 times
Reputation: 320
I dont care if people want to display religious symbols, but as american citizens we all should be concerned with our tax dollars being used to promote religion.

Displaying a cross or other religious symbol on government property does indeed run contrary to the Establishment Clause. Such a display would clearly indicate that government has taken a posture or stance regarding the establishment of religion, which is prohibited by the First Amendment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2011, 08:16 PM
 
16,300 posts, read 24,999,446 times
Reputation: 8282
Quote:
Originally Posted by nc2sc778 View Post

I can see you are a bit bitter about religion in general. It sounds to me like the Church you were brought up in probably played a role in your decision to become an Atheist, and from what you said in your post, I can see why if that kind of stuff was going on. There are people in all groups that are "in it" for nothing else than for personal gain. Unfortunately, that is the world we live in these days.


Thanks again for all the responses. Just to put this in prospective, I am a Christian and believe in God. I do not go to Church every Sunday. I have no interest in trying to "convert" anyone and I clearly understand that there many Christians out there that do not act as they should, just like every other group of people.
My aversion to religion is not based on the abuse I see many describe in these threads. There are some true horror stories of child abuse based on religion.

The behavior of many so called christians is what has caused me to recognize religion as the greatest threat to society and mankind's future that exists today. A president that starts a war because he is so deluded he thinks god told him to invade a sovereign country (a first in American history by the way ), to the hatred, bigotry, bias and racism that can be witnessed any day you care to pay attention to what is happening in our society.

I was "not raised in a church" for fortunately I am the off spring of intelligent people that also reject this silly concept of invisible unprovable friends. The only sevices I have ever attended have been for obligatory weddings of friends and funerals, the latter of which frequently leaves me extremely grateful I do not subscribe to such ignorance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2011, 09:19 PM
 
Location: Logan Township, Minnesota
15,511 posts, read 13,317,313 times
Reputation: 7407
How about if us Muslims wanted to put up some type of memorial near the WTC in memory of the Muslims who were killed in the twin towers on 9/11? Even if it is on private land and fully paid for through private funds.

Would anybody get upset over that?



OOOOps, did I actually post that?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2011, 12:40 AM
 
Location: 30-40N 90-100W
13,856 posts, read 23,004,615 times
Reputation: 6692
Quote:
Originally Posted by busterkeaton View Post
Would a Christian be offended if an upside down cross were paid for privately and used to mark a road side area?
I think the upside down cross was originally the symbol of St. Peter due to legend of him being crucified upside down. I think there's a church in Europe somewhere that has the upside down cross.

And I think the OP was wrong if they were implying atheists all have a set view on this. Atheists vary on a variety of issues. I know atheists, mostly elsewhere or in life, who aren't even particularly against religion. They think it's not true, but they're not any more against say Christianity than I am against Sikhism or Baha'i. And as that indicates Christians vary too. Some Christians would be offended to see some atheist symbol, but unless the symbol is openly hostile to religions I don't think I'd care. That caveat may sound like it screws things up, but what I mean on objecting to "openly hostile" would count for anyone. If a Catholic wanted his/her symbol to be the Buddha with a big red "X" crossing him out than I'd find that obnoxious too. So if the atheists symbol is just the atomic nuclei, a DNA helix, a big A, or a globe that's cool. It'd only be if it was like say a cross crumbling apart or "Muhammad" with a line crossing it out or something that I'd mind.

Last edited by Thomas R.; 12-07-2011 at 12:54 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top