• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Judge finally stands up to athiest lawsuit

ludin

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
57,470
Reaction score
14,585
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Ground Zero Cross: Court presses atheist group to explain why artifact is 'offensive' | Fox News

Evidently the grind to try and kill any religious symbol or preceived religious symbol has been stopped with at least 1 judge.
an atheist group tried to get the cross removed and filed a lawsuit saying that it was offensive.

the judge responded with another question is how this comes as a constitutional injury.
the cross in question was left over from the destruction of the WTC. it has been moved several times and has become a tourist attraction.

first responders before would frequent the beams and pray for other people and their co-workers.
the cross is set to go into the new museum.

This is the athiest groups second chance since the first judge threw it out and this is the federal appeals court.
the judges main question is:

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 lawyer defending the case raises a valid point as well.

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.

i found the first case the judge ruled as this.

Batts wrote that the cross “helps demonstrate how those at ground zero coped with the devastation they witnessed during the rescue and recovery effort.”

Stating that the purpose of the cross was “historical and secular,” Batts observed that it will be housed at the museum in a section called “Finding Meaning at Ground Zero,” with placards explaining its meaning and the reason for its inclusion in the exhibit. In addition, the cross will be surrounded by secular artifacts of the 9/11 terrorist attacks


“No reasonable observer would view the artifact as endorsing Christianity,” Batts wrote. The judge said that the museum’s designers “have not advanced religion impermissibly, and the cross does not create excessive entanglement between the state and religion.”

Batts noted that American Atheists also failed to allege any form of intentional discrimination or to cite any adverse or unequal treatment on the basis of their religious beliefs.

They are starting to lose more of these types of cases.
 
Last edited:

joG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reaction score
9,637
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Ground Zero Cross: Court presses atheist group to explain why artifact is 'offensive' | Fox News

Evidently the grind to try and kill any religious symbol or preceived religious symbol has been stopped with at least 1 judge.
an atheist group tried to get the cross removed and filed a lawsuit saying that it was offensive.

the judge responded with another question is how this comes as a constitutional injury.
the cross in question was left over from the destruction of the WTC. it has been moved several times and has become a tourist attraction.

first responders before would frequent the beams and pray for other people and their co-workers.
the cross is set to go into the new museum.

This is the athiest groups second chance since the first judge threw it out and this is the federal appeals court.
the judges main question is:

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 lawyer defending the case raises a valid point as well.

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.

i found the first case the judge ruled as this.

Batts wrote that the cross “helps demonstrate how those at ground zero coped with the devastation they witnessed during the rescue and recovery effort.”

Stating that the purpose of the cross was “historical and secular,” Batts observed that it will be housed at the museum in a section called “Finding Meaning at Ground Zero,” with placards explaining its meaning and the reason for its inclusion in the exhibit. In addition, the cross will be surrounded by secular artifacts of the 9/11 terrorist attacks


“No reasonable observer would view the artifact as endorsing Christianity,” Batts wrote. The judge said that the museum’s designers “have not advanced religion impermissibly, and the cross does not create excessive entanglement between the state and religion.”

Batts noted that American Atheists also failed to allege any form of intentional discrimination or to cite any adverse or unequal treatment on the basis of their religious beliefs.

They are starting to lose more of these types of cases.

I must have missed it. Is the cross on grounds belonging to the public? Otherwise it would seem totally absurd to want to prevent any type of monument.
 

Thoreau72

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 26, 2012
Messages
29,639
Reaction score
7,637
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
What a huge surprise! The cross will be surrounded by artifacts from 911.

Golly gee, who woulda thunk it? :2razz:
 

1750Texan

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 25, 2014
Messages
3,780
Reaction score
1,606
Location
Southcental Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
first responders before would frequent the beams and pray for other people and their co-workers.
the cross is set to go into the new museum.

What???

God please give all metal beams magical powers...
 

ludin

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
57,470
Reaction score
14,585
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I must have missed it. Is the cross on grounds belonging to the public? Otherwise it would seem totally absurd to want to prevent any type of monument.

I don't think anyone made it. it was just there. i think it was a random event from the destruction.
yep i just looked it up. it was not designed nor was it made by anyone. it was left over from the rubble.

so yes it would belong to the public.

i agree it would be absurd but these fanatics are attempting to squash any mention of religion in the public space more so christianity. they are going to lose this one like they have lost others.

i have to agree with the defending attorney as well.

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.

there is no constitutional right to not be offended.
 

ludin

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
57,470
Reaction score
14,585
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
What a huge surprise! The cross will be surrounded by artifacts from 911.

Golly gee, who woulda thunk it? :2razz:

that is why their case is being thrown out.
 

Sababa

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 29, 2014
Messages
2,578
Reaction score
1,089
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I am not sure how I feel about the cross since Christian leaders have made it a symbol of Christianity in how they have approached it. That shouldn't immediately eliminate it but there should be a discussion about how it is displayed and what language is used to discuss it. But that is only if there is public funding.

But here is the thing, if the museum is not publicly funded then they can put a cross, I painting of Jesus and have people making communion in the foyer since the only way we would have voice is to not go.

So we will have to see if the group can answer the question. The judge is following the law. But here is the thing, the people who are arguing in favor of the cross seem to be the same people who tried to block the Islamic center a few blocks away which was completely private and Constitutional so I have to ask. If you opposed the Islamic Center can you apologize now?
 

Mason66

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2009
Messages
26,402
Reaction score
6,227
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
If the "cross" was made when the building came down, just like thousands of other items, the fact that it is shaped like a cross is coincidence.
 

ludin

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
57,470
Reaction score
14,585
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
If the "cross" was made when the building came down, just like thousands of other items, the fact that it is shaped like a cross is coincidence.

that is pretty much what happened. it was in the shape of a cross not one made it or designed it to look like that. it was a random event.
 

ludin

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
57,470
Reaction score
14,585
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I am not sure how I feel about the cross since Christian leaders have made it a symbol of Christianity in how they have approached it. That shouldn't immediately eliminate it but there should be a discussion about how it is displayed and what language is used to discuss it. But that is only if there is public funding.

But here is the thing, if the museum is not publicly funded then they can put a cross, I painting of Jesus and have people making communion in the foyer since the only way we would have voice is to not go.

So we will have to see if the group can answer the question. The judge is following the law. But here is the thing, the people who are arguing in favor of the cross seem to be the same people who tried to block the Islamic center a few blocks away which was completely private and Constitutional so I have to ask. If you opposed the Islamic Center can you apologize now?

if you think that is why people oppose the islamic center then you are wrong. people opposed the islamic center because it was a bunch of islamic fundimentalists that decided to destroy the towers to begin with.

To many people in NY it was more like declaring a victory and giving the people that did it and believe that they do a symbol of victory.

this cross was a random event. no one designed it. it just happened to look like that after the buildings fell.
 

Sababa

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 29, 2014
Messages
2,578
Reaction score
1,089
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
if you think that is why people oppose the islamic center then you are wrong. people opposed the islamic center because it was a bunch of islamic fundimentalists that decided to destroy the towers to begin with.

Which means nothing to people who opened up the Islamic Center

To many people in NY it was more like declaring a victory and giving the people that did it and believe that they do a symbol of victory.

But the people who built the center weren't the ones who did the attack. In fact most people in Manhattan didn't have a problem with it. Oh and enjoy that it is there. You should go see it. Visit Us : Park51

this cross was a random event. no one designed it. it just happened to look like that after the buildings fell.

I know...and that is not relevant to the conversation. It is becomes a religious symbol and labeled as such I will have a problem with it if it is a tax payer funded display.
BTW the World Trade Center Heritage Museum had a wonderful display on Islam in it. Perhaps the new museum can as well.
 

ludin

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
57,470
Reaction score
14,585
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Which means nothing to people who opened up the Islamic Center



But the people who built the center weren't the ones who did the attack. In fact most people in Manhattan didn't have a problem with it. Oh and enjoy that it is there. You should go see it. Visit Us : Park51



I know...and that is not relevant to the conversation. It is becomes a religious symbol and labeled as such I will have a problem with it if it is a tax payer funded display.
BTW the World Trade Center Heritage Museum had a wonderful display on Islam in it. Perhaps the new museum can as well.

The first judge and it appears the appeals court disagrees that the cross is being used as a religious item. it doesn't matter if you have a problem with it. there is not a constitutional right to not be offended by something.

It isn't how the people viewing the islamic center view it is how the islamic nutjobs view it and they view it as a symbol of victory.
 

Sababa

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 29, 2014
Messages
2,578
Reaction score
1,089
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
The first judge and it appears the appeals court disagrees that the cross is being used as a religious item. it doesn't matter if you have a problem with it. there is not a constitutional right to not be offended by something.

Actually you didn't read what I said....but here is what is funny. Neither do you.
It isn't how the people viewing the islamic center view it is how the islamic nutjobs view it and they view it as a symbol of victory.

LOL you must have a hard time getting out of bed every day if you are so worried what people might think but that doesn't matter, the Constitution trumps your delusion.
 

Bodhisattva

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 29, 2007
Messages
95,846
Reaction score
20,327
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
I don't think anyone made it. it was just there. i think it was a random event from the destruction.

There are no random events. It is a sign from God.
 
Top Bottom