• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's 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!

Right, Wrong, Petty, Or Just Plain Weird?

sKiTzo

sKiTzo

DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2012
Messages
2,781
Reaction score
600
Location
OC California
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Other
The link below is the article about the NC town that removed the statue of a soldier praying or whatever. Someone found it "offensive" and sued the city. This costed $50,000 in legal fees that would have climbed to $1.5 million+ if they had litigated further.

First of all, how does anybody find this offensive? I'm not even religious but if I was a buddhist or satanist I still don't see how I could be affected so severely by a statue, that I should have the right to make them remove it. I'm offended that this type of instigatory behavior is catered to in society today. If someone is that affected by an inanimate external object of art, then shouldn't society deem that person a threat?

I mean really, if you don't like a statue that covers maybe 3 sq. feet of land, you don't have to linger around that 3 sq. ft. just to get upset. It doesn't have to have any bearing on you but you want it to, so instead of moving on you sue to have it removed because it doesn't suit your taste because if they don't remove it, you are going to focus on that 3 sq. ft. of space and get more offended and who knows what you'll do then? I don't feel safe with people like that in my neighborhood.

snopes.com: North Carolina Town Removes Statue of Praying Soldier
 
I am an ardent atheist, this is silly. There is no point arguing that God/gods is/are drivel with dead people. All people should be allowed to greive as they will. I have to accept that there are lots of Christians out there. They get to have their symbols on stuff like this. Just because I know they are wrong does not change the fact that they have such reasonable rights.
 
All people, including atheists, are becoming too soft and far too easily offended.

There's no "right" to go through life not being offended.

When I find a TV show offensive, I turn it off.

If you don't like a damn statue, don't friggin look at it. Ignore it.

The flip side of this whole thing is, what kind of hissy-fit would be thrown if somebody erected a 3 foot tall statue of Baphomet in the same area?
 
Dragonfly said:
All people, including atheists, are becoming too soft and far too easily offended.

There's no "right" to go through life not being offended.

When I find a TV show offensive, I turn it off.

If you don't like a damn statue, don't friggin look at it. Ignore it.

The flip side of this whole thing is, what kind of hissy-fit would be thrown if somebody erected a 3 foot tall statue of Baphomet in the same area?
Click to expand...

The Knights Templar would be pleased?
 
sKiTzo said:
The link below is the article about the NC town that removed the statue of a soldier praying or whatever. Someone found it "offensive" and sued the city. This costed $50,000 in legal fees that would have climbed to $1.5 million+ if they had litigated further.

First of all, how does anybody find this offensive? I'm not even religious but if I was a buddhist or satanist I still don't see how I could be affected so severely by a statue, that I should have the right to make them remove it. I'm offended that this type of instigatory behavior is catered to in society today. If someone is that affected by an inanimate external object of art, then shouldn't society deem that person a threat?

I mean really, if you don't like a statue that covers maybe 3 sq. feet of land, you don't have to linger around that 3 sq. ft. just to get upset. It doesn't have to have any bearing on you but you want it to, so instead of moving on you sue to have it removed because it doesn't suit your taste because if they don't remove it, you are going to focus on that 3 sq. ft. of space and get more offended and who knows what you'll do then? I don't feel safe with people like that in my neighborhood.

snopes.com: North Carolina Town Removes Statue of Praying Soldier
Click to expand...

More of the Leftist, anti-religion, anti-tradition mass hysteria. It's a mental disorder.
 
Dragonfly said:
All people, including atheists, are becoming too soft and far too easily offended.

There's no "right" to go through life not being offended.

When I find a TV show offensive, I turn it off.

If you don't like a damn statue, don't friggin look at it. Ignore it.

The flip side of this whole thing is, what kind of hissy-fit would be thrown if somebody erected a 3 foot tall statue of Baphomet in the same area?
Click to expand...

I don't know if this is equivalent. Isn't it a statue of a soldier? Not Jesus?
 
Our city just told the atheists to go pound sand. There will be an invocation at the start of all city council meetings. Of course they filed law suits instantly. But the fight is on.
 
Stupid people are stupid. It's a statue of a solider, not a religious figure. Would they prefer the statue of the soldier depicting violently killing someone? No? Then I guess praying is just fine, aint it?
 
KevinKohler said:
Stupid people are stupid. It's a statue of a solider, not a religious figure. Would they prefer the statue of the soldier depicting violently killing someone? No? Then I guess praying is just fine, aint it?
Click to expand...

Somehow I've got a feeling that yes, there is some on the extreme atheist side would prefer a statue of a soldier violently killing someone over this soldier praying.
 
I get suing to have the 10 Commandments removed from a courthouse. That makes sense to me. But this? This was not a fight worth fighting.
 
What, exactly, is a "Christian" Flag?

LadyMoonlight said:
Every time I read nonsense like this, it makes me so happy to be an aussie with no bill of rights!
Click to expand...

And every time I see a foreigner commenting on American liberties, it's makes me happy that they enjoy living elsewhere. :)
 
Last edited:
$50,000 prior to any court filing and $2,000,000 projected to go to trial? That, fellow Christian soldiers, is bull****. That city needs to 1) Recall the City Council and 2) Hire new lawyers. They bull****eth the faithful.
 
Captain Adverse said:
What, exactly, is a "Christian" Flag?



And every time I see a foreigner commenting on American liberties, it's makes me happy that they enjoy living elsewhere. :)
Click to expand...

I doubt you have as many liberties as you think you have. Anyone who disagrees with whatever is the current, popular thinking, can rarely speak out against such thinking without a backlash against them (losing their job, being sued). I don't consider that to be a liberty.
 
It's petty, stupid and because of capitulations in the past when a huge minority complains and gets their way - this type of stupidity will grow and continue to grow, as good people will simply stay silent and let it happen rather than intercede and call out the stupidity.
 
Who says he is praying anyways?

From the picture, it looks like he is just taking a knee... probably getting ready to drink some water.... then pull security....
 
LadyMoonlight said:
I doubt you have as many liberties as you think you have. Anyone who disagrees with whatever is the current, popular thinking, can rarely speak out against such thinking without a backlash against them (losing their job, being sued). I don't consider that to be a liberty.
Click to expand...

Incorrect. You have the right to speak your mind. However, in exercising any right you must also accept responsibility for how you do so. Thus, while you can speak your mind freely, you must also be willing to accept the consequences for what you say. :)
 
sKiTzo said:
The link below is the article about the NC town that removed the statue of a soldier praying or whatever. Someone found it "offensive" and sued the city. This costed $50,000 in legal fees that would have climbed to $1.5 million+ if they had litigated further.

First of all, how does anybody find this offensive? I'm not even religious but if I was a buddhist or satanist I still don't see how I could be affected so severely by a statue, that I should have the right to make them remove it. I'm offended that this type of instigatory behavior is catered to in society today. If someone is that affected by an inanimate external object of art, then shouldn't society deem that person a threat?

I mean really, if you don't like a statue that covers maybe 3 sq. feet of land, you don't have to linger around that 3 sq. ft. just to get upset. It doesn't have to have any bearing on you but you want it to, so instead of moving on you sue to have it removed because it doesn't suit your taste because if they don't remove it, you are going to focus on that 3 sq. ft. of space and get more offended and who knows what you'll do then? I don't feel safe with people like that in my neighborhood.

snopes.com: North Carolina Town Removes Statue of Praying Soldier
Click to expand...

As long as there aren't any obvious religious or theistic words or symbols, the statue should have stayed. Public land means that a memorial has to be secular i.e. religiously/theistically neutral if it is to represent everyone.
A soldier on his knee doesn't mean he IS praying. He could be saying goodbye to a buddy for instance. A christian cross, a jewish star or menora, these things are religious and therefore should not be there.
 
sKiTzo said:
The link below is the article about the NC town that removed the statue of a soldier praying or whatever. Someone found it "offensive" and sued the city. This costed $50,000 in legal fees that would have climbed to $1.5 million+ if they had litigated further.

First of all, how does anybody find this offensive? I'm not even religious but if I was a buddhist or satanist I still don't see how I could be affected so severely by a statue, that I should have the right to make them remove it. I'm offended that this type of instigatory behavior is catered to in society today. If someone is that affected by an inanimate external object of art, then shouldn't society deem that person a threat?

I mean really, if you don't like a statue that covers maybe 3 sq. feet of land, you don't have to linger around that 3 sq. ft. just to get upset. It doesn't have to have any bearing on you but you want it to, so instead of moving on you sue to have it removed because it doesn't suit your taste because if they don't remove it, you are going to focus on that 3 sq. ft. of space and get more offended and who knows what you'll do then? I don't feel safe with people like that in my neighborhood.

snopes.com: North Carolina Town Removes Statue of Praying Soldier
Click to expand...

You forgot to mention that it was a veteran that was offended and the only one that filed the lawsuit to remove the statue. I would argue that a war memorial has a lot to do with veterans and why thousands of vets visit them everyday throughout the country. So now what your telling veterans to do when they visit memorials dedicated to them, is to ignore the country they fought and sacrificed for and pretend they fought for Christianity, instead.

'...The dispute over the religiously-themed statue began in 2012 with a lawsuit filed by Hewett against King:

Hewett, a U.S. Army veteran, sued the city in November 2012 in U.S. District Court in Greensboro, alleging that King officials had violated his constitutional rights by allowing the Christian flag to fly at the Veteran's Memorial in the city's Central Park. Hewett asked a federal judge to bar the city from allowing the display of the Christian flag at the memorial, from displaying the statue of the soldier kneeling at a cross and from sponsoring religious activities at events at the site.

In July, U.S. District Court Judge James A. Beaty Jr. barred the city from promoting Christianity at ceremonies but ruled that the Christian flag and statue issues could go to trial. ..."​

Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/prayingsoldier.asp#roRIrzTWzG04EkcP.99


So I guess if it doesn't offend you personally, then no else is allowed to be offended, is that it?
 
Last edited:
Captain Adverse said:
Incorrect. You have the right to speak your mind. However, in exercising any right you must also accept responsibility for how you do so. Thus, while you can speak your mind freely, you must also be willing to accept the consequences for what you say. :)
Click to expand...

suppose a person posted a message on dp and then received backlash in public. what would you make of that?
 
Captain Adverse said:
Incorrect. You have the right to speak your mind. However, in exercising any right you must also accept responsibility for how you do so. Thus, while you can speak your mind freely, you must also be willing to accept the consequences for what you say. :)
Click to expand...

Perfectly framed. You can speak your mind but you would be wise not too because you will pay for it. That is a perfect way to "force" people to be silent on what they really think. Very clever actually. You have freedom of speech, but not really. Actually, you have more free speech in America than we do in Australia because we have 18C.
 
RogueWarrior said:
As long as there aren't any obvious religious or theistic words or symbols, the statue should have stayed. Public land means that a memorial has to be secular i.e. religiously/theistically neutral if it is to represent everyone.
A soldier on his knee doesn't mean he IS praying. He could be saying goodbye to a buddy for instance. A christian cross, a jewish star or menora, these things are religious and therefore should not be there.
Click to expand...

From reading the article, there were other specific (Christian) religious symbols being displayed. Such as the Christian flag, and a crucifix.

I get the aspect of the liberal nener-nener here, but at the same time this is just another small aspect of increasing secularism in America. Not every American who believes strongly in separation of church and state is a "liberal".

It seems we're on a path to truly realize separation of church and state. As the millennials come into power, we are sure to see more and more of this type of thing. It's happening fast, and there is intense, extreme resistance, but never the less it seems an unstoppable force.

Focusing on the statue out of context is a red herring. Look at the whole story. I don't see how this is any different than a Ten Commandments display. Taken in totum, It's clearly a display favoring a specific religion. The statue by itself, wouldn't necessarily be.

In addition to the cost, the city probably realized that legal precedent was not on there side and they would likely loose anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom